Creating Life From Scratch

Scientists for years have been working on creating cells through a man-made process. This is done by controlling the genetic processing of the cell, the latest step in creating life from scratch. The goal of molecular biologists is to try to control the behavior of the organism by manipulating the gene’s instructions.

Although the ultimate goal of creating artificial organisms is still far off, current research points to a future, for instance, in which microorganisms with specific functions may have the ability to process pollutants or produce biofuels, both beneficial uses. But some bioethicists fear this technology also will be used to create weapons and other more sinister forms of life.

In the journal Science, research scientists from the J. Craig Venter Institute published a paper in which they describe using readily available chemicals and the DNA sequence of a bacterium called Mycoplasma mycoides. With more than 400 scientists and staff, more than 250,000 square feet of laboratory space, and locations in Rockville, Md., and San Diego, Calif., JCVI bills itself as a world leader in genomic research.








The genes were used to replicate an artificial copy of the bacterium’s genome. The researchers then transplanted that genome into a cell of a different, however closely-related microbe. The artificial donor genome reprogrammed the recipient cell which went on to replicate and divide. The results were new colonies of Mycoplasma mycoides.

In current methods of genetic manipulation, scientists harvest a gene from one cell through a process called “cloning” and put it into a transfer vehicle. The vehicle is often a sub cellular structure called a plasmid. This is then inserted into a different cell which activates the gene, thus producing a scientifically or commercially useful protein.

Venter’s project was much more involved. The scientists determined the order of the 1,089,202 DNA letters of the nucleotides of the Mycoplasma mycoides genome. They constructed it in pieces, nucleotide by nucleotide; then they strung the pieces together.

The result was a synthetic copy of the genome Mycoplasma mycoides with the ability to produce naturally. However, it was not an exact copy. Fourteen of the bacterium’s 850 genes were altered or deleted during the experiment; 12 intentionally and two accidentally. But none of these were essential for the bacterium’s survival.

“We think these are the first synthetic cells that are self-replicating and whose genetic heritage started in the computer, says Dr. J. Craig Venter, 63, co-sequencer of the human genome. “That changes conceptually how I think about life.”

Other scientists, however, believe this experiment is less noteworthy.

Their contention is that only the genome was synthetic. They say the recipient cell evolved from nature billions of years ago and, because of this, it was able to process the synthetic genome and turn them on. But these same scientists praised Venter’s team for exhibiting that such a transplant was even possible.

“From a technical standpoint, this (Venter’s work) is clearly a very important advance,” says Dr. Anthony S. Fauci (right), director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institute of Health.

Further, most scientists believe that over the long haul, this technology will have an impact on understanding cellular replication. “It is a milestone of synthetic biology,” says Gregory Stephanopoulos, professor of chemical engineering and molecular biotechnology at MIT.

Researchers from the J. Craig Venter Institute created new cells but their functionality was not new. Maybe this is the next step. Instead, it manufactured a Mycoplasma mycoides genome that was virtually identical to the natural parent and able to replicate.

In that context, the research program’s success is more symbolic than practical. It is unlikely to have any direct consequence in our biotechnology world. To put this into perspective, we have been using various methods of recombinant DNA to manufacture drugs, increase the nutritional value of food, and produce pest-resistant crops.

The results of this biotechnological development also gained recent attention from President Obama. He asked that a presidential commission be formed to study the bioethical issues as well as other advances that may lie ahead in this exciting field of research.

Further, Dr. Paul S. Keim, a Northern Arizona University molecular biologist who chairs the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, said in a statement: “It does not represent an additional threat for biological weapons.” The implications are that “dual use” technologies can be employed for both good and harmful purposes.

Parts of the process remain mysterious to this day. For example, the cells receiving the synthetic genome also contained a natural genome. Additionally, the two genomes were sent into different “daughter” cells when the bacterium divided.

We at We Mean Business believe understanding some of these complex relationships may have far-reaching implications for our general quality of life.

Who knows, maybe understanding cellular replication may help us combat human cancer more effectively or better deal with cleanups of toxic chemicals found in our environment.

We can use all the help we can get!

This post is by TechMan, WMB co-author who blogs about trends, issues and ideas affecting business, industry, technology and consumers.