backtop

Print 32 comment(s) - last by Azethoth.. on Mar 20 at 6:46 PM
The DNA of a frozen specimen was used to grow embryos

Australian scientists have successfully taken the first steps necessary for bringing back an extinct frog species.

The team, led by University of New South Wales paleontologist Mike Archer, has grown embryos with the revived DNA of the extinct gastric-brooding frog for the first time.

The gastric-brooding frogs were a genus of ground-dwelling frogs that were native to Queensland in eastern Australia. It was quite an extraordinary genus because it had the only two known frog species that incubated their offspring in the stomach.

However, the gastric-brooding frog became extinct in 1983.


Now, the research team has brought their DNA back to life. It did this by reviving frozen DNA samples of a gastric-brooding frog and inserting the genetic material into donor eggs. The donor eggs were those of a distant relative -- the great barred frog. But the great barred frog's DNA was deactivated by UV light.

As time went on, the cells began dividing, showing signs of growing embryos.

The embryos have not yet turned into tadpoles, but research shows that the dividing cells do, in fact, have the DNA of the extinct frog.

"We do expect to get this guy hopping again," Archer said.

While finding viable DNA and creating the frog embryos was no easy task, this opens the door to the possibility of bringing other extinct species back to life.

Source: smh.com.au


Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Hopefully they will be careful here
By BifurcatedBoat on 3/19/2013 5:05:03 PM , Rating: 1
If the cataclysm that wiped out the dinosaurs hadn't happened, we wouldn't exist. We should be careful not to forget that fact. Nature does not care what species form its balance.




RE: Hopefully they will be careful here
By MrBlastman on 3/19/2013 5:10:50 PM , Rating: 1
Until humankind figures out a way to get off this rock and expand into the cosmos, anything we do here or achieve is meaningless. We're no better than giant lizards with pea sized brains.


By MrBlastman on 3/20/2013 5:23:36 PM , Rating: 2
I'm perplexed how someone could rationalize that what we do here IS useful if we never manage to leave the Earth (and rated me down). Science has shown we are doomed if we remain on this planet. Either mankind will wipe itself out or a natural, celestial event will lend a hand. One or the other will happen. It is a matter of time.

If we never leave the rock, we'll perish and everything we do will be worthless.


RE: Hopefully they will be careful here
By toffty on 3/19/2013 5:44:41 PM , Rating: 2
Remember, in the time of the dinosaurs CO2 levels were much higher - global temp was hotter and more humid - and oxygen levels were much lower. That's what allowed dinosaurs to flourish and why mammals were relegated to rat size. Even if man did bring dinosaurs back to life, they would not thrive… at least not until we kill ourselves off from our constant CO2 emissions and a few million years from now dinosaurs reappear as reptiles grow into dinosaurs through evolution.

Also there is no dinosaur DNA pure enough (if any at all) to actually sequence and build a full map from. So no chance in Jurassic Park happening IRL.

I would like to see Dodo Park though ;)


By Reclaimer77 on 3/19/2013 6:34:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Even if man did bring dinosaurs back to life, they would not thrive…


Obviously, we have better weapons :)

But in all seriousness, you cannot possibly predict how they would react to our environment biologically. There's just so little we actually know about them beyond fossil records.

quote:
at least not until we kill ourselves off from our constant CO2 emissions


*groans*

Please refrain from the wacko-environmentalist predictions. Of all the things that could kill off mankind, higher CO2 ain't it.

quote:
Also there is no dinosaur DNA pure enough (if any at all) to actually sequence and build a full map from. So no chance in Jurassic Park happening IRL.


Movie trivia fail!! :) They filled in the missing sequences with amphibian (frog) DNA.


By Techslave on 3/20/2013 8:21:06 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly. That's why any species we bring back should eat the lawyers first.


Didn't they watch Jurassic Park ?
By M'n'M on 3/19/2013 12:33:50 PM , Rating: 5
Little frog asks Daddy frog ... "Where do babies come from ?".
Daddy frog answers ... "From your mother's tummy."




By Azethoth on 3/20/2013 6:46:58 PM , Rating: 2
"From Mommy's Tummy"


Species Resurrection Czar
By Jim Vanus on 3/19/2013 1:50:31 PM , Rating: 2
Now that species resurrection is on the horizon, who will determine which ones are resurrected? Will species resurrection be funded publicly and privately?

I hereby appoint myself as the International Species Resurrection Czar. Henceforth, I will determine which species are worthy of resurrection so as to establish the ideal portfolio of life on planet Earth. Of course I will allow a period of public comment, although I am in no way bound by or influenced by such comments.




RE: Species Resurrection Czar
By Labotomizer on 3/19/2013 5:38:01 PM , Rating: 2
They should only qualify if they taste good on the grill. Or perhaps fried.


RE: Species Resurrection Czar
By Camikazi on 3/19/2013 5:47:23 PM , Rating: 2
I like your way of thinking, I wonder if Dodos taste good fried?


By inperfectdarkness on 3/19/2013 9:10:18 PM , Rating: 4
"...your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should."




Question
By Ammohunt on 3/19/13, Rating: -1
RE: Question
By Flunk on 3/19/2013 1:10:43 PM , Rating: 4
Like a lot of animals, it was killed off by other animals introduced by humans.


RE: Question
By Ammohunt on 3/19/13, Rating: 0
RE: Question
By Etsp on 3/19/2013 2:04:50 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see any reason why studying creatures that were ill-suited to survival is somehow of less benefit to the study of evolution than the study of animals that were well suited to it.

Understanding the traits of these creatures, including behavioral patterns would be immensely beneficial to understand exactly what types of things causes species to be ill-suited to survival, and why others are well adapted to it.

Aside from that, almost any species going extinct could be considered "bad", because that lessens the genetic diversity of all known life, which exists only on this one planet.


RE: Question
By Ammohunt on 3/19/2013 3:29:34 PM , Rating: 2
Just saying that its a good chance that certain creatures were at the end of their existence anyway and we should not introduce extinct species back into nature.


RE: Question
By MrBlastman on 3/19/2013 3:46:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Aside from that, almost any species going extinct could be considered "bad", because that lessens the genetic diversity of all known life, which is known to exist only on this one planet for now.


Correction. See above.

We may or may not find life elsewhere. Given the gigantic expanse of stars, galaxies and matter outside our own precious little sphere, it is entirely possible there is other life out there. We may never know, though. Not unless we break past the physical boundaries that hem us to this star system. It is also possible that even if we do, we may still never discover it. Or, perhaps, it is also likely that we might be alone at this point in time--time that has extended into the past for 13.77 billion years--and now is our time to exist with all prior extra-terrestrial species having gone extinct.

Whatever your view on the above, whatever you might believe, I'm sure any scientist could tell you that the study of any and all life is beneficial to us as a whole, no matter how different from us they might be.


RE: Question
By Etsp on 3/19/2013 5:00:35 PM , Rating: 2
That's why I said all known life, because there might be life elsewhere that we will never encounter (Or that we will). Or there may not be.


RE: Question
By Motoman on 3/19/2013 2:24:46 PM , Rating: 2
I'm reasonably sure that there are still living Egyptians. A few, anyway.

As for Neanderthals...well, might be some of them around too, based on some of the commentary we get here.

I guess in all seriousness though, there's no guarantee that invasive species would have been introduced without Man's help...and sure, they might have gone extinct on their own anyway.

But aside from the intrinsic scientific value in the exercise to revive such species, and then be able to study them, some of these species might just deserve a second chance, particularly if they were just killed off as a result of human stupidity.

I for one would like to see Tasmanian Tigers running around again.


RE: Question
By Ammohunt on 3/19/2013 3:42:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm reasonably sure that there are still living Egyptians. A few, anyway.


if i am not correct modern Egyptians are of Arab decent like most of north Africa.


RE: Question
By ClownPuncher on 3/19/2013 6:02:44 PM , Rating: 3
Many definitely have semitic DNA (Arab, Jew, Palestinian, Canaan...). It's a mixed pool. It always has been, at least since recorded history began.


RE: Question
By ClownPuncher on 3/19/2013 6:04:56 PM , Rating: 1
Wow, autodownrated for saying Jew?

DT is antisemitic!


RE: Question
By ClownPuncher on 3/19/2013 2:55:19 PM , Rating: 2
The species introduced by man also wreak havoc on the ecosystem.


RE: Question
By Jim Vanus on 3/19/2013 5:46:45 PM , Rating: 3
Man is a part of this planet's life system, not outside of it.

I'm tired of this "man is in the forest" BS. Man is the crown of creation, whether by divine means or evolutionary means, and will continue to define his role in the ecosystem. Now part of that role appears to be the capability to resurrect extinct species.

I'm not too worried about man's impact because the process that produced this planet's many & diverse life forms will continue to do so, as proven by life's ability to recover following past cataclysmic events.

We had better spread to other planets to secure our own survival, which could now quickly come to an end due to a meteor strike, mega-volcanic event, solar event, etc.


RE: Question
By ClownPuncher on 3/19/2013 5:59:37 PM , Rating: 2
When you introduce a species not endemic to the area and that new species devastates crops and livestock, introduces new disease and weakens the economy and ecology, why not do something about it? Dreaming of the stars and moon colonies doesn't do anything to help this particular issue at this particular time.

The frog problem down under is actually a rather large issue.


RE: Question
By Jim Vanus on 3/19/2013 7:07:42 PM , Rating: 2
Man has already come a long way in recognizing negative impacts on the environment and does do something about it. Every individual should avoid doing things that damage the environment. It is up to man to create the kind of ecosystem he wants because no other creature can.

Governments probably pose the greatest threat to the planet's ecosystems because of their proclivity for war.


RE: Question
By JPForums on 3/20/2013 8:51:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Governments probably pose the greatest threat to the planet's ecosystems because of their proclivity for war.
A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned. - Firefly

Point being, humans have the same propensity for conflict, governed or not. The difference being, under government, there are fewer, larger scale conflicts, where as without we would see dramatically more, much smaller scale conflicts. I suspect the number of deaths and amount of destruction over time would be comparable. They would just come as a constant stream rather than condensed bursts.


RE: Question
By Reclaimer77 on 3/19/13, Rating: -1
RE: Question
By MrBlastman on 3/19/2013 4:44:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But maybe tomorrow dinosaurs. Would that be ok too?


For research purposes, yes.

Besides, who knows, a T-Rex with fricken laser beams mounted to his back would be a really cool military weapon! ;)

It'd also shame all the hippies and enviro-whackos... Look, no uranium, chemical weapons, explosives, ammo, lead or anything else to mess up the environment. Only human munching badassness!


RE: Question
By Reclaimer77 on 3/19/2013 4:52:23 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not saying I'm for OR against this, I'm simply defending the right to ask questions. The OP didn't do anything wrong by asking questions imo.

quote:
It'd also shame all the hippies and enviro-whackos... Look, no uranium, chemical weapons, explosives, ammo, lead or anything else to mess up the environment. Only human munching badassness!


AHAHAHA! Love it.


RE: Question
By lilBuckwheat on 3/19/2013 4:27:42 PM , Rating: 4
So we're a part of nature and can thus wipe out a species inadvertently but can't bring it back?

By your own logic we can do anything we want and it's all part of the natural process. Mankind isn't one person at one time. This was interesting enough to someone to bring back and they did. You're trying to attack environmentalists with subtlety and failing.


"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook

Related Articles










botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki