Biology's Master Programmers(technologyreview.com)
technologyreview.com
Biology's Master Programmers
http://www.technologyreview.com/featured-story/428187/biologys-master-programmers/
5 comments
> ... I've always thought it would be cool to have programmable blood filters.
It is called flow cytometry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_cytometry
It is called flow cytometry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_cytometry
Wow, that's pretty cool! I didn't realize people were already working on this.
> Researchers today may alter, copy, and paste DNA with increasing ease, but they still struggle when it comes to actually composing DNA that does anything useful.
Leo Laporte did a TWiT Special on this recently: http://twit.tv/show/twit-live-specials/126
The discussion centered around taking existing genomes and splicing in functionality. The example given was setting up a Kickstarter project for trees that glow in the dark. The government is aggressively pursuing this tech.
[Edit] Direct links:
dna editor: http://www.genomecompiler.com/
dna printer: http://angel.co/cambrian-genomics
Leo Laporte did a TWiT Special on this recently: http://twit.tv/show/twit-live-specials/126
The discussion centered around taking existing genomes and splicing in functionality. The example given was setting up a Kickstarter project for trees that glow in the dark. The government is aggressively pursuing this tech.
[Edit] Direct links:
dna editor: http://www.genomecompiler.com/
dna printer: http://angel.co/cambrian-genomics
Hi j_s, this is Omri from Genome Compiler - thanks for the mention!
Anyone can download our free gene/genome design software and start ordering DNA today at genomecompiler.com
Omri
Anyone can download our free gene/genome design software and start ordering DNA today at genomecompiler.com
Omri
I checked-out your company. It seems really cool. And, I think that it is really awesome that you are commercializing this tech and advocating it so much on HN (seriously). But, the part I am having trouble understanding, as an amateur, is what I do with the DNA once I order it.
With software, I double-click an executable or go to a web address, and BAM! I can share pictures of kittens with my friends. How do I turn that DNA into a bio-luminescent kitten, for example, that I can show off to my friends?
With software, I double-click an executable or go to a web address, and BAM! I can share pictures of kittens with my friends. How do I turn that DNA into a bio-luminescent kitten, for example, that I can show off to my friends?
Hi Lupatus, thanks!
Well, today you have to know some biology and have access to lab (or community lab like bio-curious or genspace) to "execute" the biology. We are trying to abstract biology to make it more accessible to people outside of the research labs then you can order the DNA and transform living things in your kitchen :-)
Well, today you have to know some biology and have access to lab (or community lab like bio-curious or genspace) to "execute" the biology. We are trying to abstract biology to make it more accessible to people outside of the research labs then you can order the DNA and transform living things in your kitchen :-)
"We use genomics and informatics to find a gene cluster. But that's an information unit," Verdine says. "We have to get the molecule. Synthetic biology involves coaxing the cluster into biosynthetic factories, which then produce the molecules. If we don't have the molecule, the cluster is useless."
Once you have a scalable process for producing chemicals that are potential drugs via DNA sequencing & analysis and bacterial synthesis, how do you figure out what disease process to test those chemicals against? Do you shotgun them against a large set of disease processes? Purify the product, analyze it, and store it in a database and do theoretical work to pick out candidate diseases for the chemical? Is there something about the gene cluster that gives clues as to what the chemical might be doing for the organism?
Once you have a scalable process for producing chemicals that are potential drugs via DNA sequencing & analysis and bacterial synthesis, how do you figure out what disease process to test those chemicals against? Do you shotgun them against a large set of disease processes? Purify the product, analyze it, and store it in a database and do theoretical work to pick out candidate diseases for the chemical? Is there something about the gene cluster that gives clues as to what the chemical might be doing for the organism?
The knowledge of what the gene cluster does (by creating animals where that gene is unnaturally over or underexpressed) gives insight into what the genes product might do.
Not that different than what is currently done in biopharmaceutical research.
Not that different than what is currently done in biopharmaceutical research.
I will love to be able to switch career path at some point in the (far) future, but I don't see how to start doing the move.
Researchers today may alter, copy, and paste DNA with increasing ease, but they still struggle when it comes to actually composing DNA that does anything useful. They are still editing nature's code and learning from it. It turns out that for now, nature is still the best programmer.
Sounds like Intelligent Design.
Sounds like Intelligent Design.
I tend to see the evolutionary process as a sort of pseudo intelligence, constantly striving to make the best organism for the environment it's in.
No, intelligent design is when they take a metaphor like the one above and presume it's descriptive. Saying that your sky blue eyes are actually pieces of the sky, for instance.
Human-engineered circuits are easy to predict; they were designed in a way that made the most sense. With biology however, something that appears to be working may have a completely unrelated side effect that isn't noticed until decades later, or even something so bizarre that it isn't noticed until hundreds of years later in future generations.
The way we currently find treatments (grossly oversimplifying) is to grab some substance that looks like it might work, test it in animals, test it in humans, wait a while to make sure nothing really bad happened, and then prescribe it as a drug.
If computers get advanced enough, I would much prefer the case where all of these interactions are fully simulated. You can go through millions of variations of substances all while tracking every change they make to each part of the virtual organism. Obviously, this is a VERY long way off, but it would be nice because we wouldn't have to worry about unknown side effects.
Of course, our current way is the best we've got, and it saves millions of lives each year, so while there may be some future risk, we're doing the best we can.
*On a somewhat related note, I've always thought it would be cool to have programmable blood filters. In other words, you could essentially provide the type of molecule or cell you are looking to trap, and then something like a ccd would either redirect it or let it pass through.