Pets.ca - Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 

-->

Cloned dogs to be mated as test

technodoll
April 25th, 2007, 11:25 AM
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21604840-1702,00.html

April 23, 2007 02:22pm

THE world's first cloned dog will be mated with the world's second dog clone, in an experiment to see whether they can reproduce normally.

Snuppy, an Afghan hound who was the first dog to be created through a cloning process, will be mated later this year with second-in-line Bona, researchers in South Korea said.

Snuppy will celebrate his second birthday on Tuesday while Bona was born in June last year.

"Both Snuppy and Bona are healthy. The mating is aimed at learning about their reproductive capacity,'' said Kim Min-Kyu from Seoul National University (SNU), where the dogs were created.

Snuppy was cloned under the stewardship of now-disgraced cloning expert Hwang Woo-Suk. So far, the team has cloned one male and three female Afghan hounds.

Mr Hwang was hailed as a national hero in South Korea until a university inquiry ruled that some of his work on cloning embryonic human stem cells was fake.

He is now on trial for fraud, embezzlement, ethical breaches and other charges but has insisted he can still prove he created the first cloned human stem cells.

The work of his team in creating Snuppy has been verified by SNU and other authorities.

technodoll
April 25th, 2007, 11:26 AM
there are SO many things wrong with this, i don't know where to begin :sad:

Hunter's_owner
April 25th, 2007, 11:28 AM
TD you took the words right out of my mouth:yell: :sad:

Puppyluv
April 25th, 2007, 11:43 AM
I might get flamed for this, but the scientist in me thinks it's really realy cool. :o

mummummum
April 25th, 2007, 11:47 AM
How about "Why?"

This serves no good human or rational scientific purpose.

Puppyluv
April 25th, 2007, 11:49 AM
I disagree. Mating them will reveal genetic mutations that can't be seen in the individual. Embryological studies and examination of the offspring can provide huge insight into how successful the cloning actually is.

mummummum
April 25th, 2007, 12:09 PM
Wrong headed science Puppyluv and I encourage you to continue your studies ~ cloning will teach us notning to very little about true mutation and I find it very telling that you are more interested in the success of the cloning than of what value the cloning might be to the health of dawgs or humans.

I'm sorry to sound angry and probably on-the-high-road but there is little you can do to convince me that this sort of engineering is a responsible scientific endeavour ~ it's an experiment in ego and one-upmanship at the expense of sentient beings.

We used to experiment on humans (hey, ever read the history of the birth control pill ~ give THAT a try if you want to learn about "experiments") but don't try to sell me on the importance of nonsense-science experimentation on animals.:mad:

Hunter's_owner
April 25th, 2007, 12:47 PM
I am all for stem cell research, but when it comes to cloning something for no purposes other than to watch it grow and see how it works out, I am fully against it:shrug:

technodoll
April 25th, 2007, 12:59 PM
they want to breed the female at barely over a year old :sad:

mummummum
April 25th, 2007, 01:07 PM
they want to breed the female at barely over a year old :sad:

This dawg is not a sentient being to these kinds of junk-scientists ~ it's an "experimental subject".

rainbow
April 25th, 2007, 01:23 PM
I am all for stem cell research, but when it comes to cloning something for no purposes other than to watch it grow and see how it works out, I am fully against it:shrug:

I totally agree with that.

cpietra16
April 25th, 2007, 03:14 PM
I don't really like the idea of cloning a whole animal, but I would like to know that some day they can clon a body part, like a heart or lung or kidney...for transplant purposes only ofcourse.

Puppyluv
April 25th, 2007, 03:18 PM
I agree, she's too young.

But I still think that at some point or another, if cloning is going to be continued with as a field of science, two clones need to be mated. We have no knowledge about their reproductive capacity. Yes we know they have gametes, stem cells, projenitor cells, what have you, yes we know they have repoructive organs. But we don't know if they work.

I think cloning results in an inumeral amount of ethical dilemnas, but I also think that there are benefits to be found, and No, not just "Oooh look at me, I cloned an animal, don't I have big cahonas?"

technodoll
April 25th, 2007, 03:24 PM
can't they just use cockroaches? :o

Puppyluv
April 25th, 2007, 03:24 PM
I don't really like the idea of cloning a whole animal, but I would like to know that some day they can clon a body part, like a heart or lung or kidney...for transplant purposes only ofcourse.

One of my profs last semester invented the artificial cell. They are one of the coolest things ever, and as a result, artificial eyes, ears, skin, arms, bladders and pancreas have been developed and successfully implanted. It was truly neat to see a lot of the new research first hand.

Puppyluv
April 25th, 2007, 03:26 PM
can't they just use cockroaches? :o

Ahh see that's the thing. This gets to a lot of people, because they're dogs. People love dogs. People have personal ties to dogs. So when they hear about cloning them and such, their heart strings get pulled on, and they don't really like it.
No, a cockroach wouldn't be much help, because it's not a mammal, but even still, I bet a lot of people wouldn't have the same upset over say a rat being cloned (except maybe a few "ew, liek we need more of those" comments:D )

Prin
April 25th, 2007, 03:31 PM
If you mated two of the SAME clones together (i.e. if they have the exact same DNA), that might give you insight into mutations, etc, but mating two cloned dogs with different DNA is going to be just like mating the dogs they were cloned from and that won't benefit anybody. Plus they already know that cloned DNA is much more fragile than non-cloned DNA, so it wouldn't mutate like "regular" DNA would.

This is just propaganda science. :shrug:

Prin
April 25th, 2007, 03:33 PM
Oh and they don't say how old the dogs they cloned these from are, but that's a huge factor. If these were cloned from a 5 year old, then this dog being one year old would already have the DNA of a 6 year old. They don't know why, but the cloned animals seem to have DNA of the same age as the animals they come from.

marine's girlie
June 28th, 2007, 03:10 PM
they have the "same age" DNA because of the telomeres, which are the ends. its a complicated process (we spent DAYS!! covering it in molecular bio and genetics) but if i remember correctly the aging of DNA has to do with the number of times its copied, not how long its been around. each copy leaves ends of the DNA off thus it shortens by a few base pairs. much of aging research is aimed at the enzyme telomerase, which is involved in this process.
the interesting thing it to see what we can learn about the again process from this. if htese snaimal have a dramatically different life span, for one thing, this can argue for a "predetermined" end time. i agree puppyluv, i think this is fascinating and if you take the emotions out of it, we just might learn something.
Darwin was pretty controversial for his time, too. he delayed publishing his theories (for decades) on evolution and natural selection and only did so when it appeared that he was to be pre-empted by wallace. even galileo was excommunicated for suggesting that the earth revolved around the sun and that the earth was not the center of the universe. dont' even get me started on einstein...
i will be watching this very closely as the ramifications from the success or failure of this endeavor will no doubt affect us all in the future.
i'll probably get raked over the coals for this, but oh well....