throopw@dg_rtp.UUCP (Wayne Throop) (10/08/86)
As far as I know, neither preservation nor creation of genetic diversity is possible with current technology, and further, neither is likely as a practical, workable solution to the problems inherrent with current reductions of diversity that result from human destruction of so-called "natural" habitat. > ems@apple.UUCP (Mike Smith) > it is *VERY* cheap to store the samples. The cost > mostly comes from the collection process. Yes, it is cheap to store frozen samples. But after the extinction of the species so stored, the frozen genetic samples cannot be retreived and turned into living animals again with anything near current technology. (This can be done with some plants and some simpler animals, but definitely not all, or even most.) Worse still, long term low-temperature storage degrades the germination rates of seeds, viability of sperm, and so on. Therefore, freezing is *NOT* a currently viable long-term storage method. As far as I know, no such method now exists. > janw@inmet.UUCP > When I said our activity *can* rapidly increase genetic diversi- > ty, - I was speaking of *future* technology. However, there ap- > pears to be nothing (as long as progress continues) to prevent it > happening. If you think it *cannot*, please say why. I agree with this. *NOTE* that what this is saying is that increasing genetic diversity to replace that being destroyed today is something that humans *CANNOT* now do, and we do *NOT* know when (if ever) humans will be able to accomplish it. Further note that, as argued above, even the artificial preservation of genetic diversity (let alone its creation) is beyond current technology. > pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M Koloc) > Hmmm?. What is cross breeding, some kind of bizarre Christian ritual? > I always thought it implied "diversity". For example, aren't apples > and pears different species? But isn't there a third species that was > developed from the cross breeding of certain families of apples and > pairs?? And, what's the story on zebras and horses and their cross. This has nothing to do with genetic diversity. No new genes are produced, no new functions are created, no new proteins synthesized. Hybridization and crossbreeding is an efficent way to *express* *existing* diversity efficently, and this is one reason why sex was "invented". But is has nothing to do with creating the diversity in the first place. > One of the problems here is that "genes" will behave differently > when "spliced". So an identical gene in one species may have a > different "coded" effect in a another species simply because of > the differences in ordering, junction and clock rates. Gene jumping > and change in chromosome numbers also takes place, although not > routinely. Yes, but for such glitches to result in coding for a genuinely new, useful function is a chance event. And we know of no way to make it happen rapidly. Or more correctly, we *can* make it happen rapidly, with the side-effect of producing more *failed* cases... the ratio of failed to successful cases is more or less fixed. Thus, the only way to discover what we have "created" by such methods is to search through a tremendous flury of useless genetic mistakes. Other than lots and lots of time, there is no way to sift out the good results from the bad, and nature is as good at that as we are. We would have to look through trillions upon trillions of spurrious results to find genuine, viable diversity equal to the millions of species that currently exist. Again, it is important to keep straight that gene-splicing and gene-decoding is *NOWHERE* *NEAR* being genetic design or genetic invention. Like sex, gene-splicing or decoding is just a way of more efficently expressing existing diversity. Now, I must emphasize that I agree that it is *possible* that technology invented in the future might "save the day" in the nick of time. However, I view the argument that the problem of decreasing diversity will be solved when we get to it as similar to somebody telling me "G'wan... get aboard this here roller-coaster. Sure, it's got no brakes, and the track ends right in the middle, but after it's in motion, we'll take care of these little details..." -- Perfection must be reached by degrees; she requires the slow hand of time. --- Voltaire -- Joy and peace and love Come from heaven above; Schnitzel and filet mignon Come from the animal kingdom. --- Red Clay Ramblers -- Wayne Throop <the-known-world>!mcnc!rti-sel!dg_rtp!throopw