# Site General > General Herp > Herp Broadcast >  Brave new world of genetic editing for reptiles-

## Bogertophis

How do we feel about GMO versus non-GMO reptiles???   :Confused:   See link below...

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019...-lizard-albino

----------

_Alter-Echo_ (04-04-2019),Bodie (04-03-2019),_gunkle_ (04-03-2019)

----------


## Bodie

IMO it's crossing the line.  I don't like it

----------

*Bogertophis* (04-03-2019)

----------


## gunkle

As long as the animals are cared for I don't see any fundamental difference from this and selective breeding.

----------


## Bogertophis

> IMO it's crossing the line.  I don't like it


I posted it as it's newsworthy, but I'm with you, honestly.  Getting further & further from natural selection makes me uncomfortable.

There's so many GMO foods now, more than most of us realize...but the issues have been swept under the rug rather than openly addressed, & where profits are 
involved, we know who's interest "matters" don't we?

----------


## Stewart_Reptiles

Where is the fun in that, and what's next injecting reptile embryos to make them glow in the dark  :Confused:

----------

*Bogertophis* (04-03-2019)

----------


## distaff

> Where is the fun in that, and what's next injecting reptile embryos to make them glow in the dark


We already have GloFish for that.  
Not sure how they are made, but NOT natural.
Marketed to kids....meaning, the unfortunate fish are doomed.    :Sad:

----------

*Bogertophis* (04-03-2019),_Dianne_ (04-03-2019),_tttaylorrr_ (06-03-2019)

----------


## Ax01

is this thing for producing morphs? b/c 4 Albino's outta 146 eggs is not very good odds. the non-GMO method is way better for breeders and less costly.

or can this bring back a species from extinction or the brink of extinction? b/c that might be kool.

----------

_Alicia_ (04-04-2019),*Bogertophis* (04-03-2019),_tttaylorrr_ (06-03-2019)

----------


## Bogertophis

> ...or can this bring back a species from extinction or the brink of extinction? b/c that might be kool.


This would be cool & something I was wondering too...it's just a real "double-edged sword" though.

----------


## bcr229

I'm not familiar with the techniques they are using, or the why/how.  I do think that if the technique could be used to stop species from going extinct, or to make chemical changes to snake venom so that different compounds to fight diseases could be made from it, that would be cool also.

----------

_Alicia_ (04-04-2019),*Bogertophis* (04-03-2019),_tttaylorrr_ (06-03-2019)

----------


## Timelugia

It can totally be used to bring species back, and there's a lot of discussion concerning that. Ethics and such. Personally I'm for genetic engineering simply because it has so much potential to do good. 
I mean, making albino lizards to sell isn't maybe the best use. But I get the sense the researchers who did this were more going for a "will this work" and testing the method itself rather than trying to make something to sell.

----------

*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019),_tttaylorrr_ (06-03-2019)

----------


## Ax01

> or can this bring back a species from extinction or the brink of extinction? b/c that might be kool.





> This would be cool & something I was wondering too...it's just a real "double-edged sword" though.


i think it's very obvious that the first thing we need to bring back are T-Rex's and 'Raptors.

----------

*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019)

----------


## ladywhipple02

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

----------

*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019),fadingdaylight (04-04-2019),_tttaylorrr_ (06-03-2019)

----------


## Ax01

^ what is yo JWA handle? add me (Axxy19) and we can battle sometimes.   :Smile:

----------


## MarkL1561

> I posted it as it's newsworthy, but I'm with you, honestly.  Getting further & further from natural selection makes me uncomfortable.
> 
> There's so many GMO foods now, more than most of us realize...but the issues have been swept under the rug rather than openly addressed, & where profits are 
> involved, we know who's interest "matters" don't we?


Humanity would be dead if it wasnt for GMOs. That term has unfortunately become primarily a marketing term. In reality almost all of our food has been genetically modified to resist disease/pest and/or have higher yield. For example strawberries are gmo as they exhibit extreme polyploidy to produce larger fruit. Seedless watermelons are produced by instigating aneuploidy. Many grains are altered to produce more and be resistant to pest and environmental changes. Therere a ton of examples, way too many to list. The people that claim not to eat any gmos are completely ignorant as thats not even possible in this day and age. Even commonly eaten vegetables are man made through selective breeding and genetic alteration. This means that even organic vegetables are still technically genetically modified. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------

_Alicia_ (04-04-2019),_Ax01_ (04-04-2019),*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019),_Godzilla78_ (04-04-2019),Timelugia (04-04-2019),_tttaylorrr_ (06-03-2019)

----------


## Ax01

^ yep that's true.

that reminds me of an old Simpsons episode where Lisa produces a giant tomato using steroids that can help solve hunger. well intentioned but i don't want to be pumped full of steroids. i think we could solve alotta problems like w/ world hunger if we can increase yield and size and distribution. there's ways u can use GMO's for good but then there are the agricorps or whatever use GMO's to copyright their veggies and seeds so that they cannot reproduce so we have to rely on buying their stuff after each harvest. it's scary if and when we lose the ability to reproduce crops b/c of modification. it can be used to solve problems, but it conflicts w/ profits.

----------

*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019),_tttaylorrr_ (06-03-2019)

----------


## ladywhipple02

> ^ what is yo JWA handle? add me (Axxy19) and we can battle sometimes.


My handle is RedHound #8284... bring it! I love this game lol

----------

_Ax01_ (04-04-2019)

----------


## Bogertophis

> Humanity would be dead if it wasnt for GMOs. That term has unfortunately become primarily a marketing term. In reality almost all of our food has been genetically modified to resist disease/pest and/or have higher yield. For example strawberries are gmo as they exhibit extreme polyploidy to produce larger fruit. Seedless watermelons are produced by instigating aneuploidy. Many grains are altered to produce more and be resistant to pest and environmental changes. Therere a ton of examples, way too many to list. The people that claim not to eat any gmos are completely ignorant as thats not even possible in this day and age. Even commonly eaten vegetables are man made through selective breeding and genetic alteration. This means that even organic vegetables are still technically genetically modified. 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I realize there are many sides to this...and as someone already said, the "best use" sure isn't about making albino lizards, but they have to start somewhere. 
I'm far from being "anti-science" & I was acquainted with a man (retired scientist) who worked on seedless watermelons way back when...(he has since passed away).

I'm actually really glad to have your knowledgeable input on this...it's not my field, unless you count "caring about nature" & "loving to eat"?   :Very Happy: 

When it comes to food crops, I also know that the national & worldwide goals of "not running out" in the face of climate or pest issues is pretty important & the more crowded 
we allow our planet to get, the more we have to rely on science to bail us out.  I'm old enough to appreciate slower times when farmers could work with nature & grow 
organically rather than dominating the process with chemicals & patented GMO seeds.  While this yields a lot more, it also tends to result in monocultures (less diversity) 
that actually puts the whole system at risk, not to mention that the farming run-off is causing massive die-offs in our natural bodies of water....I hope we humans can 
figure it all out in time.

----------

_Ax01_ (04-04-2019)

----------


## MarkL1561

> I realize there are many sides to this...and as someone already said, the "best use" sure isn't about making albino lizards, but they have to start somewhere. 
> I'm far from being "anti-science" & I was acquainted with a man (retired scientist) who worked on seedless watermelons way back when...(he has since passed away).
> 
> I'm actually really glad to have your knowledgeable input on this...it's not my field, unless you count "caring about nature" & "loving to eat"?  
> 
> When it comes to food crops, I also know that the national & worldwide goals of "not running out" in the face of climate or pest issues is pretty important & the more crowded 
> we allow our planet to get, the more we have to rely on science to bail us out.  I'm old enough to appreciate slower times when farmers could work with nature & grow 
> organically rather than dominating the process with chemicals & patented GMO seeds.  While this yields a lot more, it also tends to result in monocultures (less diversity) 
> that actually puts the whole system at risk, not to mention that the farming run-off is causing massive die-offs in our natural bodies of water....I hope we humans can 
> figure it all out in time.


Farming runoff would actually be worse without gmos because more herbicides and pesticides would need to be used. Youre correct in that it is a major ecological problem. I actually have a few coworkers that are looking into pesticide effects on amphipods. Monocultures are typically just a result of our farming methods and gmos dont determine whether someone grows a monoculture or not. Theyre easier to mass harvest which is why theyre so prevalent. That and cycling crops to ensure the topsoil remains fertile. Unfortunately our global population is too large for small scale organic farming to support everyone imo. Although we do need to find better ways to minimize ecological degradation though for sure. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------

_Ax01_ (04-04-2019),*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019),Timelugia (04-04-2019)

----------


## Stewart_Reptiles

The topic is snakes not farming!

----------

Bodie (04-04-2019)

----------


## Ax01

> ^ what is yo JWA handle? add me (Axxy19) and we can battle sometimes.





> My handle is RedHound #8284... bring it! I love this game lol


oh crap! you're a Level 20 playa w/ all the best epic legendary and unique hybrids.




> The topic is snakes not farming!


well the article was about gene editing for reptiles w/ Anoles as an example and Boger talks about GMO's in her first post, so i think talking about farming GMO is fair play and was apart of the natural flow of conversation and the thread.

----------

*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019)

----------


## MarkL1561

> The topic is snakes not farming!


Sorry my bad  


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------

*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019)

----------


## Alter-Echo

If they start adding plant genes to snakes, then this thread WILL be about farming!  :Wink:

----------

_Ax01_ (04-04-2019),*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019),Timelugia (06-03-2019)

----------


## Ax01

> If they start adding plant genes to snakes, then this thread WILL be about farming!


that's a good idea! maybe we can finally get some green BP morphs.

Edit: or some veggies that taste like snakes and reptiles.

----------

_Alter-Echo_ (04-07-2019),*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019)

----------


## MarkL1561

> If they start adding plant genes to snakes, then this thread WILL be about farming!


Maybe we can get actual vine snakes.....?   


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------

_Alter-Echo_ (04-07-2019),*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019)

----------


## bcr229

How about a snake that can turn sunlight into food through photosynthesis?

----------

_Alter-Echo_ (04-07-2019),*Bogertophis* (04-04-2019)

----------


## MarkL1561

> How about a snake that can turn sunlight into food through photosynthesis?


Youd have to incorporate chloroplasts within every cell of the animal which likely is impossible. It would be awesome if it was possible though! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

----------

*Bogertophis* (06-03-2019),_tttaylorrr_ (06-03-2019)

----------


## Ax01

ok, update!

looks like there is reportedly shorter lives for CRISPR gene-edited human babies. not sure about those CRISPR Albino lizards tho.

story: https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0603124709.htm



> *CRISPR baby mutation significantly increases mortality*
> _Two copies of mutated CCR5 gene associated with lower survivability_
> 
> A genetic mutation that a Chinese scientist attempted to create in twin babies born last year, ostensibly to help them fend off HIV infection, is also associated with a 21% increase in mortality in later life, according to an analysis by University of California, Berkeley, scientists.
> 
> The researchers scanned more than 400,000 genomes and associated health records contained in a British database, UK Biobank, and found that people who had two mutated copies of the gene had a significantly higher death rate between ages 41 and 78 than those with one or no copies.
> 
> Previous studies have associated two mutated copies of the gene, CCR5, with a fourfold increase in the death rate after influenza infection, and the higher overall mortality rate may reflect this greater susceptibility to death from the flu. But the researchers say there could be any number of explanations, since the protein that CCR5 codes for, and which no longer works in those having the mutation in both copies of the gene, is involved in many body functions.
> 
> ...


and here: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/...babies/590815/



> *A Mutation That Resists HIV Has Other Harmful Consequences*
> 
> He Jiankui chose a famous mutation to edit into human embryos. Scientists are still trying to figure out everything it does.
> 
> In the 1990s, virologists in New York learned of a genetic mutation that would become one of the most famous ever discovered. They found it in a man who could not be infected with HIV. He turned out to be missing just 32 letters in a gene called CCR5, and remarkably, it was enough to make him resistant to the virus killing so many others. About 1 percent of people of European descent carry two copies of this mutation, now known as CCR5-Δ32.
> 
> In 2018, a Chinese scientist named He Jiankui made the mutation infamous when he attempted to use CRISPR to edit CCR5-Δ32 (pronounced CCR5-delta-32) into human embryos. He chose this mutation, he said, because the babies father was HIV-positive, and he wanted to make the resulting twin girls resistant to the virus. CCR5-Δ32 is also, after all, one of the most studied mutations.
> 
> Hes work immediately provoked outrage among scientists, who knew enough to know how much they did not know about the risks of altering CCR5. And now a new study suggests that CCR5-Δ32 is indeed harmful overall.
> ...


tons of stories breaking on this:
https://www.newscientist.com/article...ene-mutations/
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/6...earlier-death/
https://www.engadget.com/2019/06/03/...fe-expectancy/

----------

*Bogertophis* (06-03-2019),_tttaylorrr_ (06-03-2019)

----------


## Bogertophis

> Youd have to incorporate chloroplasts within every cell of the animal which likely is impossible. It would be awesome if it was possible though! 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


"Spoil-sport", lol... :Wink:

----------


## dr del

Woah!! this is not known by the general public in the uk!

----------


## 4stringed

Finally a post on here that I can contribute to. My background is in biochemistry and my higher level courses were all on synthetic biology and genetic engineering (mostly from a microbiology standpoint).

So the funny thing that someone mentioned about glow in the dark snakes is dead on. One of the most common genes that's added to an organism for proof of concept is a flourescent gene from jellyfish. They've put in in everything from bacteria to cats and they glow under plack light. So glowing snakes are very possible and would probably be one of the first ones we see.

Because these changes are genetic the offspring will cary the trait so once a gene is added it can be bred into other animals. The potential of this is that if you could isolate a gene from another species like a green tree python involved in green pigmentation you could splice that into a ball and get green ball pythons. 

Could this have adverse effects? Yes, but there are genes that breeders work with now that have detrimental effects on animals, such as any of the wobble genes and I guarentee that scientists would not add an animal with anything as much as a wobble to the breeding pool and multiple generations would likely be studied before they were available to the public. Now if the spider gene was isolated and found to be linked to a gene that causes the wobble issues, the spider gene could be isolated, copied and spliced into another animal and we could have spiders without wobble.

----------

