Scientists Clone Two Black-Footed Ferrets from Frozen Tissues
smithsonianmag.com
smithsonianmag.com
Which is kind of interesting, because domesticated ferrets are a different species. (I wonder if this means the clones have mitochondrial DNA from the domesticated ferret egg.)
"officials captured 24 ferrets and started a breeding program."
This article in Science about the first cloned black-footed ferret (https://www.science.org/content/article/conservation-first-c...) specifically says, "Cloning endangered species faces unique ethical questions, as well. One is whether the clone, which can hold trace DNA from its surrogate mother, is actually the same as the species that researchers are trying to save. For example, black-footed ferret clones are created using eggs from domestic ferrets, meaning they carry that species’ mitochondrial DNA, which is left in the egg after its nucleus is extracted."
(Later in the article: "... apart from her mitochondrial DNA, most of which comes from her domestic mother, genetic analysis shows she is 100% a blackfooted ferret".)
"Domestic ferret" refers to the domesticated European polecat (e.g., https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/399272-Mustela-furo).
>On 14 February 2003, Dolly was euthanised because she had a progressive lung disease and severe arthritis.[6] A Finn Dorset such as Dolly has a life expectancy of around 11 to 12 years, but Dolly lived 6.5 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_(sheep)
Or was it even a problem at all? It seems clones made later haven’t had that issue? It shows the power of a meme in installing that idea in the consciousness of society.
Google is telling me this in its AI answer.
>Research suggests that telomeres are rejuvenated during nuclear reprogramming by somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT).
How would they even measure their accuracy? By definition, there's not even a baseline to measure against, right?
No process is 100% clean in biology, that's how we get random mutation and evolution of species
My guessis that they already used the same tools with sheeps or rats in a freezer. Combining that info with some other tool to measure how much dqmage the sample gpt [1] may give an estimation.
[1] I guess the exact damage depends on how fast it froze and the changes of tenperature and other difficut to know details.
There are a number of ways that we can check for errors. First, there are many different sequencing and alignment tools, each with different characteristics. For example, by cross checking long read sequencing from a nanopore sequencing deveice and more common Illumina paired end sequencing, we can see where they agree or disagree and then further check with another validated method like Sanger sequencing, if we’re really confused about which is correct. Also, we already know a bit about biology, so we can check the sequence for obviously wrong patterns. Like if our sequencing says the ferret has a mutation that would destroy a critical protein’s function (e.g. a frameshift or premature stop codon) but the ferret looks fine, then we can reasonably infer that the sequencing was wrong somehow. Finally, you’re right that there’s not a “baseline”. All processes in biology are inherently lossy. That said genome sequencing uses pieces of the cellular machinery (DNA polymerase) that can copy gene sequences with incredibly high fidelity, so we rely on biology’s incredible achievement to be reasonably sure that we’re getting the “right” answers.
This is the best of what the intenet can be.
And to the reconstruction: I don't think it does in this case. As they talk about working with frozen cells and we are not in the realm of frozen Mammuts who's genomes has degraded and needs to be reconstructed. In that case yes, we would talk about smaller pieces.
My limited (and likely wrong) understanding of Syrian hamsters is they're all descended from a few specimens someone collected a long time ago. Is there something special in hamsters that prevents genetic issues? Do they not have a lot of recessive characteristics?