Scientists Grew a Synthetic Mouse Embryo With a Brain and a Beating Heart (sciencealert.com) 31
An anonymous reader quotes a report from ScienceAlert: In a monumental leap in stem cell research, an experiment led by researchers from the University of Cambridge in the UK has developed a living model of a mouse embryo complete with fluttering heart tissues and the beginnings of a brain. The research advances the recent success of a team comprised of some of the same scientists who pushed the limits on mimicking the embryonic development of mice using stem cells that had never seen the inside of a mouse womb. In the past, researchers in embryology have focused largely on plucking choice stem cells from parts of an embryo that would grow into an animal and encouraging them to proliferate in glassware full of specially selected nutrients. Over the years, this method has resulted in clumps of cells containing the basic starting structures of a gut and a fold of tissues called the neural tube. What the so-called 'gastruloid' model contains in form, however, it lacks in function. Many features expected to develop alongside these tissues aren't present, making it harder to draw parallels between the model and an authentic growing embryo. There are ways to encourage brain-like structures to appear, as well as functioning heart tissue and a more complex gut tube. Yet workarounds based on comparatively simple hormonal soups can only go so far.
Mixing stem cells representative from these three major tissue groups and improving on previous methods for their development in vitro (that means in a dish) into an embryoid, the team found their model could progress under its own steam to develop a nervous system equivalent to a natural mouse embryo at 8.5 days post-conception. The step is a small one, equivalent to just a single day of development for an unborn mouse. But a lot can happen in that 24 hours of gestation. The synthetic embryoid also contained foundational heart tissue that twitched out a beat and the beginnings of a gut, as well as the start of structures that in an actual embryo could build parts of the skeleton, muscles, and other tissues beneath the skin. On its own, the model wouldn't continue to develop into anything like a thriving baby mouse. Science is far from able to produce anything so advanced as a functional organ from stem cells alone, let alone an entire animal. While the resemblance is quite significant in research, it is -- so to speak -- only skin deep, lacking the signals that would see it transform into the fully-formed organism it models. Having a collection of tissues that authentically reflects development outside of a body provides researchers with the opportunity to not only observe, but ethically test genetic changes that could help improve our understanding of how our bodies grow. The findings appear in a study published in the journal Nature.
Mixing stem cells representative from these three major tissue groups and improving on previous methods for their development in vitro (that means in a dish) into an embryoid, the team found their model could progress under its own steam to develop a nervous system equivalent to a natural mouse embryo at 8.5 days post-conception. The step is a small one, equivalent to just a single day of development for an unborn mouse. But a lot can happen in that 24 hours of gestation. The synthetic embryoid also contained foundational heart tissue that twitched out a beat and the beginnings of a gut, as well as the start of structures that in an actual embryo could build parts of the skeleton, muscles, and other tissues beneath the skin. On its own, the model wouldn't continue to develop into anything like a thriving baby mouse. Science is far from able to produce anything so advanced as a functional organ from stem cells alone, let alone an entire animal. While the resemblance is quite significant in research, it is -- so to speak -- only skin deep, lacking the signals that would see it transform into the fully-formed organism it models. Having a collection of tissues that authentically reflects development outside of a body provides researchers with the opportunity to not only observe, but ethically test genetic changes that could help improve our understanding of how our bodies grow. The findings appear in a study published in the journal Nature.
In-vitro gametogenesis (Score:1)
This is nice, but what we really need to do is develop in-vitro gametogenesis. The ability take any cell, such as a skin cell, and turn it into an egg cell and/or a sperm cell. That will enable a lot of applications beyond just letting gay people have kids. We can finally decouple sex and reproduction. It will make it easier to edit out any genes that are harmful and fix/add genes that are beneficial. It might even be possible to add celebrity synthetic gene sequences to enable say Einstein's neural archite
Re: (Score:2)
God damn you're funny, that's just pure comedy gold.
Re: (Score:1)
Asked, they didn't seem to hear me.
Sorry. Aside from the obvious joke, why would we want to create more people with disabilities? I'm sure people who aren't able to hear find comfort in being around other deaf people, and people who can't see find comfort in being around other blind people, in an environment designed to accommodate blindness. However, intentionally not removing this trait from the embryos to preserve the uniqueness of the disabled community seems like a momentary lapse of critical thinking.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I know someone who had GSS [wikipedia.org]. It's passed down through genetics. I'm sure they would have opted to remove it from the genetic code if the technology existed. I can't think of a reason why anybody would want to pass on a disease or disability to their children if it can be avoided.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I know someone who had GSS [wikipedia.org]. It's passed down through genetics. I'm sure they would have opted to remove it from the genetic code if the technology existed. I can't think of a reason why anybody would want to pass on a disease or disability to their children if it can be avoided.
Or Huntington's Disease. I hardly see a Society for the Preservation of Huntington's being formed anytime soon.
Re: (Score:3)
Why do gay people need to have kids?
I have no idea, some of them want to .. it's up to an individual to want or don't want something.
Why do we need to decouple sex and reproduction?
Because I think it would be cool. I am not asking YOU to decouple anything btw.
Why do we need to add celebrity Genoese to anybody?
What is a Genoese? Some kind of Pizza? Christopher Columbus?
Humans revolved to reproduce via sex for a lot of good reasons. Just because YOU'RE not getting any sex doesn't mean there is a fault with the process.
I feel like the idea that they should be related is stupid. Sex ought to be for fun, not anything else. Evolution's greatest blunder was to link the two. Why couldn't it come up with two separate rituals or processes? One pleasure ritual and a different ritual for replic
Re: (Score:2)
Having read through the posts it looks like you're the moron here to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do we need to add celebrity Genoese to anybody?
What is a Genoese? Some kind of Pizza? Christopher Columbus?
You wrote "It might even be possible to add celebrity synthetic gene sequences to enable say Einstein's neural architecture."
So Genoese seems like a good made up word to fit your neuro-speak made up idea of 'adding synthetic gene sequences to enable a celebrity's neural architecture'.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do gay people need to have kids?
Why do other people need to have kids? The planet is overpopulated as it is.
Why do we need to decouple sex and reproduction?
Because it would make sense. There's plenty of people who want to have sex but no kids and people who want to have kids but no sex. I have no idea why there's this pressing urge why those two MUST be connected. I mean, I wouldn't want to take it away from people who want this connection to exist, but I absolutely support the idea of being able to have one without the other. Life is not a soup kitchen, you don't have to endure the se
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure if troll, sarcastic, or actually believes what they wrote...
"We can finally decouple sex and reproduction." -> I wasn't aware that their pairing was a problem...or that there were people actively looking for a solution...
"It will make it easier to edit out any genes that are harmful and fix/add genes that are beneficial." -> And who, pray tell, gets to decide which genes are harmful...and which are beneficial?
"It might even be possible to add celebrity synthetic gene sequences to enable say E
Re:In-vitro gametogenesis (Score:4, Insightful)
New Species (Score:3)
I, for one, welcome our new protomouse overlords.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
In good conservative religious fashion, the evil doers will be burned at the stake. Maybe next Tuesday.
Re: (Score:2)
Researchers from the University of Cambridge in the UK [...] complete with fluttering heart tissues and the beginnings of a brain.
Looks like there's a new candidate in the running for UK PM.
Re: (Score:2)
I am still trying to figure out where I can buy one of these minibrains [mysteriousuniverse.org] to keep as a pet.
Finally, hope for 2024 (Score:2)
I'm throwing all my support behind this candidate.
Re: (Score:2)
A candidate with a brain and a heart sure would be something different.
Re: (Score:2)
The Party will never allow it.
I don't want to offend its creators, (Score:2)
What does it taste like ?
Next step: Axolotl Tanks (Score:1)
Blade runner future (Score:1)
What I want is a Tamagotchi with an actual brain (Score:2)
and a noise filter that turns existential pain into calming music!
"3D printed" viruses are becoming very affordable (Score:2)
The technology has been around for about a decade, but you can you can now order up your very own virus from a biotech company for roughly $1000. Just send them a file with the bases and back comes your virus. About 30,000 bases will get you a coronavirus. Virologists no longer use messy CRISPR processes, just print the whole thing. The technology has become very accessible.
So if you want to know, for example, if the Furin cleavage site is what makes SARS-CoV-2 infectious, you just print a version that