Genetic Enginer And The Gene Gun

[steve_bank]

Saw this on show yesterday. The gener gun shoots a DNA sample at high speed into a target.

One thing that came up was it is not precise. It is not like picking up a gene from a sample with tweezers and stitching it into target DNA. Also genes can have multiple functions, so replacing or adding genes can be unpredictable. Sobean strain modified for climate cracked in sunlight as one example.

The machine ends up turning on all genes.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_gun#Limitations

In genetic engineering, a gene gun or a biolistic particle delivery system, originally designed for plant transformation, is a device for delivering exogenous DNA (transgenes) to cells. The payload is an elemental particle of a heavy metal coated with DNA (typically plasmid DNA). This technique is often simply referred to as biolistics.

This device is able to transform almost any type of cell, including plants, and is not limited to transformation of the nucleus; it can also transform organelles, including plastids.


Limitations[edit]

Biolistics introduces DNA randomly into the target cells. Thus the DNA may be transformed into whatever genomes are present in the cell, be they nuclear, mitochondrial, plasmid or any others, in any combination, though proper construct design may mitigate this. Another issue is that the gene inserted may be overexpressed when the construct is inserted multiple times in either the same or different locations of the genome.[5] This is due to the ability of the constructs to give and take genetic material from other constructs, causing some to carry no transgene and others to carry multiple copies; the number of copies inserted depends on both how many copies of the transgene an inserted construct has, and how many were inserted.[5] Also, because eukaryotic constructs rely on illegitimate recombination, a process by which the transgene is integrated into the genome without similar genetic sequences, and not homologous recombination, which inserts at similar sequences, they cannot be targeted to specific locations within the genome,[5] unless the transgene is co-delivered with genome editing reagents.

Advantages[edit]

Biolistics has proven to be a versatile method of genetic modification and it is generally preferred to engineer transformation-resistant crops, such as cereals. Notably, Bt maize is a product of biolistics.[5] Plastid transformation has also seen great success with particle bombardment when compared to other current techniques, such as Agrobacterium mediated transformation, which have difficulty targeting the vector to and stably expressing in the chloroplast.[5][8] In addition, there are no reports of a chloroplast silencing a transgene inserted with a gene gun.[9] Additionally, with only one firing of a gene gun, a skilled technician can generate two transformed organisms.[8] This technology has even allowed for modification of specific tissues in situ, although this is likely to damage large numbers of cells and transform only some, rather than all, cells of the tissue.[

 

[J842P]

My impression is that this is mostly used for plants who can handle this sort of crazy genome-wide modifications (being true hermaphrodites has its advantages).

Anyway, this is very old technology. The current latest would be something like CRISPR, but even before CRIPR there was much more advanced techniques than using a gene gun.

 

[Kharakov]

Gene gun. Really Steve?

 

[Jokodo]

Saw this on show yesterday. The gener gun shoots a DNA sample at high speed into a target.

One thing that came up was it is not precise. It is not like picking up a gene from a sample with tweezers and stitching it into target DNA. Also genes can have multiple functions, so replacing or adding genes can be unpredictable. Sobean strain modified for climate cracked in sunlight as one example.

The machine ends up turning on all genes.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_gun#Limitations

In genetic engineering, a gene gun or a biolistic particle delivery system, originally designed for plant transformation, is a device for delivering exogenous DNA (transgenes) to cells. The payload is an elemental particle of a heavy metal coated with DNA (typically plasmid DNA). This technique is often simply referred to as biolistics.

This device is able to transform almost any type of cell, including plants, and is not limited to transformation of the nucleus; it can also transform organelles, including plastids.


Limitations[edit]

Biolistics introduces DNA randomly into the target cells. Thus the DNA may be transformed into whatever genomes are present in the cell, be they nuclear, mitochondrial, plasmid or any others, in any combination, though proper construct design may mitigate this. Another issue is that the gene inserted may be overexpressed when the construct is inserted multiple times in either the same or different locations of the genome.[5] This is due to the ability of the constructs to give and take genetic material from other constructs, causing some to carry no transgene and others to carry multiple copies; the number of copies inserted depends on both how many copies of the transgene an inserted construct has, and how many were inserted.[5] Also, because eukaryotic constructs rely on illegitimate recombination, a process by which the transgene is integrated into the genome without similar genetic sequences, and not homologous recombination, which inserts at similar sequences, they cannot be targeted to specific locations within the genome,[5] unless the transgene is co-delivered with genome editing reagents.

Advantages[edit]

Biolistics has proven to be a versatile method of genetic modification and it is generally preferred to engineer transformation-resistant crops, such as cereals. Notably, Bt maize is a product of biolistics.[5] Plastid transformation has also seen great success with particle bombardment when compared to other current techniques, such as Agrobacterium mediated transformation, which have difficulty targeting the vector to and stably expressing in the chloroplast.[5][8] In addition, there are no reports of a chloroplast silencing a transgene inserted with a gene gun.[9] Additionally, with only one firing of a gene gun, a skilled technician can generate two transformed organisms.[8] This technology has even allowed for modification of specific tissues in situ, although this is likely to damage large numbers of cells and transform only some, rather than all, cells of the tissue.[

Are you trying to tell is that some methods of genetic engineering are almost as unsafe as natirally ocurring mutations?

The Horror!

 

[Gun Nut]

The "gene gun" has given me a great idea for a video game.

think "ovum" from Heretic.

 

[steve_bank]

Saw this on show yesterday. The gener gun shoots a DNA sample at high speed into a target.

One thing that came up was it is not precise. It is not like picking up a gene from a sample with tweezers and stitching it into target DNA. Also genes can have multiple functions, so replacing or adding genes can be unpredictable. Sobean strain modified for climate cracked in sunlight as one example.

The machine ends up turning on all genes.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_gun#Limitations

In genetic engineering, a gene gun or a biolistic particle delivery system, originally designed for plant transformation, is a device for delivering exogenous DNA (transgenes) to cells. The payload is an elemental particle of a heavy metal coated with DNA (typically plasmid DNA). This technique is often simply referred to as biolistics.

This device is able to transform almost any type of cell, including plants, and is not limited to transformation of the nucleus; it can also transform organelles, including plastids.


Limitations[edit]

Biolistics introduces DNA randomly into the target cells. Thus the DNA may be transformed into whatever genomes are present in the cell, be they nuclear, mitochondrial, plasmid or any others, in any combination, though proper construct design may mitigate this. Another issue is that the gene inserted may be overexpressed when the construct is inserted multiple times in either the same or different locations of the genome.[5] This is due to the ability of the constructs to give and take genetic material from other constructs, causing some to carry no transgene and others to carry multiple copies; the number of copies inserted depends on both how many copies of the transgene an inserted construct has, and how many were inserted.[5] Also, because eukaryotic constructs rely on illegitimate recombination, a process by which the transgene is integrated into the genome without similar genetic sequences, and not homologous recombination, which inserts at similar sequences, they cannot be targeted to specific locations within the genome,[5] unless the transgene is co-delivered with genome editing reagents.

Advantages[edit]

Biolistics has proven to be a versatile method of genetic modification and it is generally preferred to engineer transformation-resistant crops, such as cereals. Notably, Bt maize is a product of biolistics.[5] Plastid transformation has also seen great success with particle bombardment when compared to other current techniques, such as Agrobacterium mediated transformation, which have difficulty targeting the vector to and stably expressing in the chloroplast.[5][8] In addition, there are no reports of a chloroplast silencing a transgene inserted with a gene gun.[9] Additionally, with only one firing of a gene gun, a skilled technician can generate two transformed organisms.[8] This technology has even allowed for modification of specific tissues in situ, although this is likely to damage large numbers of cells and transform only some, rather than all, cells of the tissue.[

Are you trying to tell is that some methods of genetic engineering are almost as unsafe as natirally ocurring mutations?

The Horror!

No more or less than a new jet.

The GMO lobby claims modifies foods are utterly and irrefutably safe which is not true in all aspects.

Humans have a limited capacity to se all ends even with computer aids and simulations. I know that from experience Joko my boy.

Not fear mongering, but sobering. Science does assume the liberty to do what it chooses without any restraint or regard for consequences or public input. Because someone is a scientists does not mean infallibility or wisdom.

Mouse pox. Australian scientists inadvertently created a virulent virus.

Africanized bees. Bees from a genetic experiment in South America escaped and made their way to the USA. Very aggressive. They have killed humans and animals. They do not like a lot of the plants regular bees like and they take over regular bee hives, threatening agriculture and wild pollination.

There is likely more. Genetically engineered crops have become a monoculture and could be susceptible to future pathogens. There is a global seed bank I belie in Norway saving non modified natural seeds as a hedge.

The BT potato was engineered with an insect gene to produce a toxin for a pest. It worked for a while until natural selection selected pests resistant to the toxin. No one sees all ends. The over prescription of antibiotics leading to drug resistant superbugs. A ways back I had an infection of flesh eating bacteria. I was lucky. The doctors found one antibiotic that still worked, otherwise I'd be dead.

Go ahead and make an argument....

 

[Jokodo]

Saw this on show yesterday. The gener gun shoots a DNA sample at high speed into a target.

One thing that came up was it is not precise. It is not like picking up a gene from a sample with tweezers and stitching it into target DNA. Also genes can have multiple functions, so replacing or adding genes can be unpredictable. Sobean strain modified for climate cracked in sunlight as one example.

The machine ends up turning on all genes.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_gun#Limitations

In genetic engineering, a gene gun or a biolistic particle delivery system, originally designed for plant transformation, is a device for delivering exogenous DNA (transgenes) to cells. The payload is an elemental particle of a heavy metal coated with DNA (typically plasmid DNA). This technique is often simply referred to as biolistics.

This device is able to transform almost any type of cell, including plants, and is not limited to transformation of the nucleus; it can also transform organelles, including plastids.


Limitations[edit]

Biolistics introduces DNA randomly into the target cells. Thus the DNA may be transformed into whatever genomes are present in the cell, be they nuclear, mitochondrial, plasmid or any others, in any combination, though proper construct design may mitigate this. Another issue is that the gene inserted may be overexpressed when the construct is inserted multiple times in either the same or different locations of the genome.[5] This is due to the ability of the constructs to give and take genetic material from other constructs, causing some to carry no transgene and others to carry multiple copies; the number of copies inserted depends on both how many copies of the transgene an inserted construct has, and how many were inserted.[5] Also, because eukaryotic constructs rely on illegitimate recombination, a process by which the transgene is integrated into the genome without similar genetic sequences, and not homologous recombination, which inserts at similar sequences, they cannot be targeted to specific locations within the genome,[5] unless the transgene is co-delivered with genome editing reagents.

Advantages[edit]

Biolistics has proven to be a versatile method of genetic modification and it is generally preferred to engineer transformation-resistant crops, such as cereals. Notably, Bt maize is a product of biolistics.[5] Plastid transformation has also seen great success with particle bombardment when compared to other current techniques, such as Agrobacterium mediated transformation, which have difficulty targeting the vector to and stably expressing in the chloroplast.[5][8] In addition, there are no reports of a chloroplast silencing a transgene inserted with a gene gun.[9] Additionally, with only one firing of a gene gun, a skilled technician can generate two transformed organisms.[8] This technology has even allowed for modification of specific tissues in situ, although this is likely to damage large numbers of cells and transform only some, rather than all, cells of the tissue.[

Are you trying to tell is that some methods of genetic engineering are almost as unsafe as natirally ocurring mutations?

The Horror!

No more or less than a new jet.

The GMO lobby claims modifies foods are utterly and irrefutably safe which is not true in all aspects.

Humans have a limited capacity to se all ends even with computer aids and simulations. I know that from experience Joko my boy.

Not fear mongering, but sobering. Science does assume the liberty to do what it chooses without any restraint or regard for consequences or public input. Because someone is a scientists does not mean infallibility or wisdom.

Mouse pox. Australian scientists inadvertently created a virulent virus.

Africanized bees. Bees from a genetic experiment in South America escaped and made their way to the USA. Very aggressive. They have killed humans and animals. They do not like a lot of the plants regular bees like and they take over regular bee hives, threatening agriculture and wild pollination.

There is likely more. Genetically engineered crops have become a monoculture and could be susceptible to future pathogens. There is a global seed bank I belie in Norway saving non modified natural seeds as a hedge.

The BT potato was engineered with an insect gene to produce a toxin for a pest. It worked for a while until natural selection selected pests resistant to the toxin. No one sees all ends. The over prescription of antibiotics leading to drug resistant superbugs. A ways back I had an infection of flesh eating bacteria. I was lucky. The doctors found one antibiotic that still worked, otherwise I'd be dead.

Go ahead and make an argument....

No need.

You already made my argument for me.