Enzymes stitch together non-natural DNA [Getting closer to lab-made life]

Nature Magazine ^ | 24 February 2004 | PHILIP BALL

[PatrickHenry]

Footnotes are at the original website. Bold font added by your humble poster.

This involves promising lab results, and practical benefits too. What are the anti-evos gonna do now?

[PatrickHenry]

PING. [This ping list is for the evolution side of evolution threads, and sometimes for other science topics. FReepmail me to be added or dropped.]

[martin_fierro]

[ASA Vet]

What are the anti-evos gonna do now?

Does it really matter what they say or do?
It's best to just ignore them.

They've been left behind.

[marktwain]

We are seeing the building blocks of molecular nanotechnology being created. Think of this "artifical DNA" as storage media for molecular assemblers!

[qam1]

What are the anti-evos gonna do now?

What they always do and move the goalpost.

You can't create a cat from scratch in laboratory now can you?

[<1/1,000,000th%]

These can be used to make forms of DNA that are more robust than the natural kind and do not break apart when exposed to high temperatures.

I hope this stuff doesn't escape in viral form. Ouch!

[Lucas McCain]

I'm not sure what you mean. Why is this a problem for "anti-evos?"

[Ichneumon]

You can't create a cat from scratch in laboratory now can you?

I can create scratches from a cat, does that count?

[Saturnalia]

Maine Coon?

[The_Reader_David]

Odd, absent the assertions that the work was done by 'harnessing the principles of evolution' and that in the future the artificial genome 'might evolve on its own', it sounds a bit more like an instance of intelligent design than of evolution: intelligent actors select what enzymes to use. And, where is the 'selection' process in this if not in the scientist's minds and actions?

All your rhetoric does is prove that evolutionism, whatever its scientific roots, has beeome as much a closed, unfalsifiable system in the minds of its vocal proponents as creationism is in the minds of its.

[kaylar]

What a beautiful cat!

[adakota]

I agree. Darwinians have not harnessed the principles of evolution. These scientists have used their intelligence to manipulate a piece of machinery.

[js1138]

How about a cat named Scratches?

[VadeRetro]

By systematically tinkering with the structure of DNA polymerase at one or two specific locations, researchers can make enzymes that work with artificial bases. But this technique, called 'rational design', is a tedious and unpredictable process.

"Going the full distance is very difficult to do in a rational way," says Rui Sousa of the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. Sousa has designed polymerases that are being used commercially.

Romesberg and his co-workers tried a different approach called 'directed evolution'. They made millions of mutant polymerases by randomly scrambling part of the natural enzyme's chemical structure. Most of the mutants were useless, but some were quite good at stitching together non-standard bases. They plucked these useful mutants out of the crowd, and repeated the mutation and selection process to fine-tune their abilities.

Hah! It's turning out that "intelligent design" IS variation and [some or other kind of] selection.

[general_re]

Is a computer simulation of a bouncing ball a priori inaccurate or incorrect merely because it takes place in an artificial, simulated environment?

[ZULU]

When they can create life out of nothing, then I'll pay attention.

[VadeRetro]

Post 15. It's turning out that the fast way to get anywhere in bio design is to "randomly" create a ton of variations and then do some kind of selection trials. Then you do another round with the survivors.

That is precisely the Darwinian model.

[Michael_Michaelangelo]

All your rhetoric does is prove that evolutionism, whatever its scientific roots, has become as much a closed, unfalsifiable system in the minds of its vocal proponents as creationism is in the minds of its.

Worth repeating! I especially liked the little addition to the title of the article.

Also from the original article (sub-title):

Guided evolution and HIV help create man-made stuff of life.

Has there ever been anything *but* guided "evolution"?

[aMorePerfectUnion]

"to find an enzyme capable of assembling non-standard DNA1."

If you're going to try to "create life" in a lab, you should start with your own material - not God's.

When scientists create something from nothing, I'll be the first in line to praise them!

ampu