'closely related' is relative, mitochondrial DNA is fairly conservative Replacing mitochondrial DNA might be possible but afaik hasn't been accomplished to date
-
-
I would be very surprised if their nanoparticles were capable of encapsulating whole chromosomes. Lot of nanoparticle delivery systems out there, but nobody (except Craig Venter maybe) is trying to deliver whole chromosomes.
-
I suggest reading the other paper on the single-chromosome yeast. They CRISPR (basically) all the yeast chromosomes together while deleting a bunch of centromeres and telomeres. The same technique can be used to assemble a chromosome from smaller DNA fragments.
-
It's an interesting idea, but the problem here is scale. Eukaryotic genomes are generally *massive* (though yeast is a notable exception). Getting 3 billion bp of DNA into a single cell is gonna be really, really hard.
-
Though there's an interesting convergence here with another conversation I was having yesterday, on the feasibility of making, say, a mouse (or human) 'minimal genome.'
-
It's likely that 70-90% of the human genome is non-functional, so if you could strip that out, the problem becomes somewhat simpler.
-
Yes. This conversation has convinced me that removing mitochondria outright may be, er, a challenge. I still think we'll have a single-chromosome, printed mammal in five years or less.
-
I think that's extremely unlikely, but I'd love to be proven wrong.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.