Fish DNA Makes Limbs Sprout in Mice

Mr Uncle Leroy

All Star
Joined
May 19, 2012
Messages
10,364
Reputation
-170
Daps
4,625
The genome of a primitive fish that was once thought to have died when the dinosaurs did has now been sequenced by scientists — and when put into mice, some of the fish DNA caused mice to sprout limbs.

The new analysis, described today (April 17) in the journal Nature, could help to reveal how primitive fish swapped their fins for limbs when they moved from land to sea.
The fish, called a coelacanth, seems to carry snippets of DNA that can turn on genes that code for forelimbs and hind limbs in mice. The new discovery could shed light on how four-legged creatures, called tetrapods, evolved.

"It really is a cornerstone from which we can view tetrapod evolution," said study co-author Chris Amemiya, a geneticist at the Benaroya Research Institute in Seattle, Wash.

Living fossil
The coelacanth was once thought to have gone extinct about 70 million years ago, roughly around the time dinosaurs vanished. But in 1938, a fish trawler brought a bluish-purple, 3.3-foot-long (1 meter) fish with fleshy fins to the South African naturalist Marjorie Courtenay-Latimer. It turned out to be an African coelacanth.

Over the next several decades, scientists unearthed a few hundred of the elusive creatures living around the Comoros Islands in the Indian Ocean, as well as off parts of Indonesia.

The coelacanth intrigued scientists because it was a kind of "living fossil": It had changed so little over the last 400 million years that it might reveal how fish first grew limbs and walked on land.

Deepening the mystery, other research showed that fish, mice and other animals carry many of the same genes. But in fish, those genes code for fins, whereas in land-based animals, they create limbs.

Mysterious genes
Because the fish were so endangered, it was difficult to study their body plan in detail. But Amemiya and his colleagues managed to get tissue samples from a coelacanth from the Comoros Islands.

Using that tissue, the team sequenced the primitive fish's genome and analyzed it. They found a small snippet of DNA called an enhancer that was present in both coelacanths and four-legged creatures, but missing in other fish.

The enhancer was part of the "dark matter" of the genome — the large fraction of the genome that doesn't code for proteins, but somehow turns genes on and off.

When they put the DNA snippet into mice, it seemed to turn on the genes to make the forelimbs and hind limbs in mice, Amemiya told LiveScience.
Limb beginnings

The coelacanth's genome may harbor many more secrets to the evolution of limbs, said Nancy Manley, a developmental geneticist at the University of Georgia, who was not involved in the study.
"The genome really sets a path forward for the next 10 or 20 years," said Scott Edwards, an evolutionary biologist at Harvard University, who was not involved in the study.

But coelacanths aren't the only primitive fish that could shed light on limb evolution. Another bizarre fish called the lungfish may actually be more closely related to four-legged creatures, "so that's going to be an important species to look at," Edwards told LiveScience.

Fish DNA Makes Limbs Sprout in Mice
 

Blackking

Banned
Supporter
Joined
Jun 4, 2012
Messages
21,566
Reputation
2,486
Daps
26,223
I'm sure their probably correct in some of their assumptions... but is the fact that that fish has a gene that alters the structure of mice prove that they (or fish like them) evolved into land animals? Why wouldn't the coelacanth really evolve in 400 million years when allopatry and different climates and environments makes it so fish can evolve within a million years? I'm sure environments and situations have changed over and over again in 400m years.

How do we know that these fish just didn't have that gene for a certain reason and theres not a connection between that and the mice growing new limbs; because if you took that same enhancer gene from another land animal and put it into mice, the mice would also grow new limbs in that instance.

plus http://www.npr.org/2012/12/12/167052782/land-creatures-might-not-have-come-from-the-sea
Ancient Australian fossils were on land, not at sea, geologist proposes | Communications
Controversial claim puts life on land 65 million years early : Nature News & Comment

We can't make far fetching assumptions based on every single experiment. Because then we will make it a fact. And take that fact along w other 'facts' and create a 'fact' based theory that really is a bunch of assumptions linked together.
 

Mr. Somebody

Friend Of A Friend
Joined
May 10, 2012
Messages
28,262
Reputation
2,041
Daps
43,613
Reppin
Los Angeles

I dont think this increases the credibility of evolution because scientists are breaking the laws of evolution by using technosorcery to artificially enhance organisms. If anything that proves creation is true since God can do in a day what scientists think it takes millions of years to accomplish. :jawalrus:
 

Brown_Pride

All Star
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
6,416
Reputation
785
Daps
7,887
Reppin
Atheist for Jesus
see they are fuking with these genes on a level that's starting to make me uncomfortable. Not from a religious standpoint, from a "giant poisonous mouse with arms, cat like reflexes and human intelligence" hunting humans.

What happens when they flip the switch that allows that mold to turn ants into zombies and then BAMB we got mouse overlords? :ufdup:
 

the cac mamba

Veteran
Bushed
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
102,485
Reputation
13,656
Daps
299,364
Reppin
NULL
I dont think this increases the credibility of evolution because scientists are breaking the laws of evolution by using technosorcery to artificially enhance organisms. If anything that proves creation is true since God can do in a day what scientists think it takes millions of years to accomplish. :jawalrus:

well, the bolded statement is based on absolutely nothing.

as for the rest of your post, do you believe in evolution at all? i think thats its possible that a god could have overseen evolution

however, its much more plausible that evolution is a naturally occurring process, and the idea that 'god oversaw evolution' is a convenient copout from religious fools who have been forced to part with a little bit more of their dated, :flabbynsick: creation myths
 

Mr. Somebody

Friend Of A Friend
Joined
May 10, 2012
Messages
28,262
Reputation
2,041
Daps
43,613
Reppin
Los Angeles
well, the bolded statement is based on absolutely nothing.

as for the rest of your post, do you believe in evolution at all? i think thats its possible that a god could have overseen evolution

however, its much more plausible that evolution is a naturally occurring process, and the idea that 'god oversaw evolution' is a convenient copout from religious fools who have been forced to part with a little bit more of their dated, :flabbynsick: creation myths

I believe simple traits can change but do i believe a whale can turn into a horse. No i do not.
 

Dirty_Jerz

Ethiop
Joined
May 12, 2012
Messages
12,602
Reputation
-820
Daps
11,376
Reppin
the evils of truth, and love
see they are fuking with these genes on a level that's starting to make me uncomfortable. Not from a religious standpoint, from a "giant poisonous mouse with arms, cat like reflexes and human intelligence" hunting humans.

What happens when they flip the switch that allows that mold to turn ants into zombies and then BAMB we got mouse overlords? :ufdup:





tumblr_mjfyeaBg5S1s7fctio1_500.gif
 

MostReal

Bandage Hand Steph
Joined
May 18, 2012
Messages
25,319
Reputation
3,362
Daps
57,221
I dont think this increases the credibility of evolution because scientists are breaking the laws of evolution by using technosorcery to artificially enhance organisms. If anything that proves creation is true since God can do in a day what scientists think it takes millions of years to accomplish. :jawalrus:

:bryan:

you killin'em


they so mad :russ:
 
Top