[轉錄]Re: [爆卦] 人造細菌,創造出新的生命!!

看板PCSH91_305作者nfsong (圖書館我來了)時間14年前 (2010/05/29 20:39)推噓0(0推 0噓 0→)

留言0則, 0人參與討論串3/3 (看更多)

※ [本文轉錄自 nfsong 信箱] 作者: vintw (陽光好青年) 看板: Gossiping 標題: Re: [爆卦] 人造細菌,創造出新的生命!! 時間: Fri May 21 08:26:35 2010 看了一下論文和報導，距離原PO所說的"只利用基本化學物質材料, 合成打造出一種細菌"還有一段距離，如果用遊戲主機來比喻：(當然不是很嚴謹的比喻，請生物專家們多多包涵) 現在的基因工程大多像是改機，也就是主機板上面加一顆晶片或接線繞過一顆晶片，然後看看結果如何等等。而這個實驗辦到的是：某人買了所有PS3上面的晶片和空板後，把它合體塞到XBOX360的盒子裡面開機可以玩。但是最後成品的內部架構幾乎都和PS3一樣(只差一點點)，盒子和電源等也是XBOX360的。這件事當然和自己從塑膠粒和晶圓作出完整的遊戲主機(從0創造生命)，還有一點距離。就連隨意的在主機上加上自己想要的功能這個目標目前也還未達成。所以我們離人體練成或是新人類等等還有很長一段距離要走。但是這個實驗依然是很重要的里程碑。類似的研究與爭議在幾年前就有出現過了，在這篇報導中也有提到， JCVI本是生科領域頂尖的研究機構之一， Craig Venter已經有好多篇Nature / Science / PLoS等頂級期刊論文作者裡面的Hamilton O. Smith是1978年的諾貝爾生醫獎得主，陣容堅強。八卦是：John Craig Venter 雖然是學術成就極高的一名大師，但是他總試著把科學上面的發現私有化然後拿來賣錢，包含他發現的基因也去請專利，這樣的作法，造成了搞不好哪天你體內的某個基因卻被某家公司拿去申請專利的隱憂，關於生命科學上的發現是不是可以申請專利然後拿來營利，將會是未來法律的挑戰之一。下面試著翻譯一下Science的新聞稿，大家或許可以參考一下會更了解，我的英文不好，生物也不是專門，有翻譯錯誤的地方還請各位不吝指正。合成基因組為細菌帶來新生命 Synthetic Genome Brings New Life to Bacterium 伊莉莎白‧潘妮西 Elizabeth Pennisi 十五年來，克萊格·凡特都再追尋一個夢想：由藍圖建立一個基因組，進而創造出合成的生命。今天，他和他的JCVI(以他命名的實驗室)實驗室團隊，在馬里蘭州的洛克威爾以及加州的聖地亞哥，宣佈他們已經實現了這個夢想。在本週的Science Express期刊中，他們介紹了製造細菌染色體的詳細步驟，並且將染色體成功的轉殖到細菌中取代了原本的DNA。透過合成的基因組，微生物細胞開始自我複製並且製造新的蛋白質。 For 15 years, J. Craig Venter has chased a dream: to build a genome from scratch and use it to make synthetic life. Now, he and his team at the J. Craig Venter Institute (JCVI) in Rockville, Maryland, and San Diego, California, say they have realized that dream. In this week's Science Express (www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/science.1190719), they describe the stepwise creation of a bacterial chromosome and the successful transfer of it into a bacterium, where it replaced the native DNA. Powered by the synthetic genome, that microbial cell began replicating and making a new set of protein 馬克‧培德，來自奧勒岡州波特蘭的理德學院的哲學家兼人工生命科學期刊的編輯表示；這是"生物學和生物技術歷史上決定性的一刻"。來自馬里蘭州巴爾的摩約翰霍普金斯醫學院的酵母菌生物學家杰夫‧博克表示："這為合成基因組技術領域開創了一個重要的里程碑"。 This is "a defining moment in the history of biology and biotechnology," says Mark Bedau, a philosopher at Reed College in Portland, Oregon, and editor of the scientific journal Artificial Life. "It represents an important technical milestone in the new field of synthetic genomics," says yeast biologist Jef Boeke of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland. 凡特團隊所合成的基因組幾乎和天然細菌所具備的一樣。這項成就奠基於龐大的經費：估計約四千萬美金，以及許多人的努力：20位研究員努力了超過十年。但是，儘管這項實驗成功了，想要人工設計出可以製造石油或是具有醫藥用途的基因組，並且把這些基因組丟到細菌裡面"開機"卻還是一件不實際的事。保羅‧凱姆，來自夫拉格斯塔的北亞歷桑納大學的分子基因學家表示："在基因工程師可以可以混合、配對、以及完全設計生物的基因組之前，我們還有極大的挑戰"。 The synthetic genome created by Venter's team is almost identical to that of a natural bacterium. It was achieved at great expense, an estimated $40 million, and effort, 20 people working for more than a decade. Despite this success, creating heavily customized genomes, such as ones that make fuels or pharmaceuticals, and getting them to "boot" up the same way in a cell is not yet a reality. "There are great challenges ahead before genetic engineers can mix, match, and fully design an organism's genome from scratch," notes Paul Keim, a molecular geneticist at Northern Arizona University in Flagstaff. 本週公開的"合成"細菌起源於凡特和他在JCVI實驗室的同事克萊德‧哈奇森三世以及漢米爾頓‧史密斯的一個計畫：他們希望找出維持細菌生命的最短基因組，同時加入人工基因，讓細菌得以變成製造人類所需元素的工廠。在1995年，由三人所領導的團隊成功的定序了一種叫做Mycoplasma genitalium細菌的的染色體，染色體的總長度為六十萬，是已知非共生生物裡面最短的。這個微生物體內大約有500個基因，研究發現刪掉其中的100個基因並不會造成負面影響。 The "synthetic" bacteria unveiled this week have their origins in a project headed by Venter and JCVI colleagues Clyde Hutchison III and Hamilton Smith to determine the minimal instructions needed for microbial life and from there add genes that could turn a bacterium into a factory producing compounds useful for humankind. In 1995, a team led by the trio sequenced the 600,000-base chromosome of a bacterium called Mycoplasma genitalium, the smallest genome of a free-living organism. The microbe has about 500 genes, and researchers found they could delete 100 individual genes without ill effect (Science, 14 February 2003, p. 1006). 但是要証明上述實驗提出的基因組是生存的最小所需，卻需要合成整條細菌的染色體，並且讓它可以在受體細胞內正常運作，這兩個步驟卻因為操縱整條染色體的技術並不存在而延宕了好幾年。在2007年，凡特、史密斯、哈奇森和他們的同事們終於成功的將一種細菌的染色體轉殖到另一種細菌上。2008年，他們成功的合成出帶有特殊"浮水印"DNA的 M. genitalium染色體，這些浮水印可以幫助區分人工和自然的染色體。 But confirming the minimal genome suggested by those experiments required synthesizing a full bacterial chromosome and getting it to work in a recipient cell, two steps that have taken years because the technology to make and manipulate whole chromosomes did not exist. In 2007, Venter, Smith, Hutchison, and colleagues finally demonstrated that they could transplant natural chromosomes from one microbial species to another (Science, 3 August 2007, p. 632). By 2008, they showed that they could make an artificial chromosome that matched M. genitalium's but also contained "watermark" DNA sequences that would enable them to tell the synthetic genome from the natural one (Science, 29 February 2008, p. 1215). 但是把這兩個步驟合在一起卻陷入了僵局。一部分原因是M. genitalium這個細菌長的實在太慢，導致一個實驗要花好幾個禮拜。所以研究團隊決定中途更換細菌，開始定序基因組長度為一百萬但是卻長的比較快的M. mycoides，並且開始合成它的染色體。去年，他們成功的把M. mycoides的染色體取出來，修改過後轉殖回一種近親細菌 M.capricolum裡面。所以下一步就是證明：整條合成的細菌DNA也可以如法炮製。 But combining those steps became bogged down, in part because M. genitalium grows so slowly that one experiment can take weeks to complete. The team decided to change microbes in midstream, sequencing the 1-million-base genome of the faster-growing M. mycoides and beginning to build a synthetic copy of its chromosome. Last year, they showed they could extract the M. mycoides natural chromosome, place it into yeast, modify the bacterial genome, and then transfer it to M. capricolum, a close microbial relative (Science, 21 August 2009, p. 928; 25 September 2009, p. 1693). The next step was to show that the synthetic copy of the bacterial DNA could be handled the same way. 研究人員從採購DNA序列作為建造他們的合成染色體的第一步。他們向一家公司買了超過一千條長度為1080的序列，這些序列包含了M. mycoides的全基因組。為了把這些序列結合起來，每條序列的尾巴80個鹼基都和下一段序列重疊。為了讓重組過的基因可以被辨識，研究人員在其中的四段DNA序列中藏入了編碼過的電子信箱，許多參與計畫人員的姓名，和幾句名言。 The researchers started building their synthetic chromosome by going DNA shopping. They bought from a company more than 1000 1080-base sequences that covered the whole M. mycoides genome; to facilitate their assembly in the correct order, the ends of each sequence had 80 bases that overlapped with its neighbors. So that the assembled genome would be recognizable as synthetic, four of the ordered DNA sequences contained strings of bases that, in code, spell out an e-mail address, the names of many of the people involved in the project, and a few famous quotations. 透過酵母菌一步步的結合整條合成DNA，研究人員先成功了長度為一萬的序列，接著是十萬，最後是完整的基因組(一百萬)。但是，當他們開始把合成的基因阻塞進 M. capricolum細菌中時，什麼事都沒發生。接下來就跟程式設計師幫軟體除錯一樣，他們有系統的嘗試轉殖各種自然與人工DNA的組合。等到他們終於鎖定了合成DNA中僅僅一個字的錯誤時，已經過了三個月的時間。 Using yeast to assemble the synthetic DNA in stages, the researchers first stitched together 10,000-base sequences, then 100,000-base sequences, and finally the complete genome. However, when they initially put the synthetic genome into M. capricolum, nothing happened. Like computer programmers debugging faulty software, they systematically transplanted combinations of synthetic and natural DNA, finally homing in on a single-base mistake in the synthetic genome. The error delayed the project 3 months. 經過好幾個月的轉殖各種失敗組合，研究團隊的運氣終於在上個月變好。生物學家發現藍色的菌落在週末快速的於培養皿中成長(藍色表示這些細胞是新的人工基因組)。計畫負責人丹尼爾‧吉勃森馬上傳訊給凡特報喜。"我拿了我的攝影機衝進去拍 (培養皿)"凡特說到。 After months of unsuccessfully transplanting these various genome combinations, the team's fortune changed about a month ago when the biologists found a blue colony of bacteria had rapidly grown on a lab plate over the weekend. (Blue showed the cells were using the new genome). Project leader Daniel Gibson sent Venter a text message declaring success. "I took my video camera in and filmed [the plate]," says Venter. 他們把這個菌落的DNA定序，確認這些細菌具有合成的DNA，並且確認這些細菌的確是製造 M. mycoides而不是M capricolum的蛋白質。這個菌落就像是一般的M. mycoides一樣成長。凡特說："顯然我們把一種細胞變成了另外一種"。 They sequenced the DNA in this colony, confirming that the bacteria had the synthetic genome, and checked that the microbes were indeed making proteins characteristic of M. mycoides rather than M capricolum. The colony grew like a typical M. mycoides as well. "We clearly transformed one cell into another," says Venter. 田納西州納許維爾的范德比爾特大學的分子生物學家安東尼‧佛斯特表示："這是個很令人興奮的成就"。但是他和其他學者仍然強調這項研究並沒有製造出真正合成的生命，因為基因是被放在一個既存的細胞中。 "That's a pretty amazing accomplishment," says Anthony Forster, a molecular biologist at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee. Still, he and others emphasize that this work didn't create a truly synthetic life form, because the genome was put into an existing cell. 研究人員強調，由凡特團隊所開發的技術目前還無法吸引任何潛在的生物恐怖份子。不過，來自加州柏克萊大學、研究合成生物學的人類學家保羅‧拉比諾表示："這項實驗的確改變了道德上的想像"。"長遠看來，這技術將被大量的用在合成人工基因。"麻省理工學院的社會科學家的肯尼斯‧歐表示："目前，我們對未來可能帶來的利益和風險可說是一無所知。" At the moment, the techniques employed by Venter's team are too difficult to appeal to any potential bioterrorists, researchers stress. Nonetheless, "this experiment will certainly reconfigure the ethical imagination," says Paul Rabinow, an anthropologist at the University of California, Berkeley, who studies synthetic biology. "Over the long term, the approach will be used to synthesize increasingly novel designed genomes," says Kenneth Oye, a social scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. "Right now, we are shooting in the dark as to what the long-term benefits and long-term risks will be." 歐補充說道：隨著越來越多"人工的"生命出現，主管機關應該盡速制定相關的規範。來自紐約州立大學石溪分校，在2002年帶領團隊成功製造出第一個合成病毒的愛卡德‧威默表示："很不幸的是，(該技術)還是有被濫用的機會" As ever more "artificial" life comes into reach, regulatory agencies will need to establish the proper regulations in a timely fashion, adds Oye. "The possibility of misuse unfortunately exists," says Eckard Wimmer of Stony Brook University in New York state, who led a team that in 2002 created the first synthetic virus (Science, 9 August 2002, p. 1016). 凡特表示JCVI已經申請了涵蓋該項成果的數個專利，這些專利最後將歸於為此計劃提供大部分經費的他的公司：Synthetic Genomics所有。渥太華的技術監督組織ETC Group 認為這樣的舉動將導致合成生命的壟斷，但是其他人並不擔心。歐表示：基於目前的狀況，取得並持有這些專利，"Synthetic Genomics不可能成為合成生物學界的微軟"。 Venter says that JCVI has applied for several patents covering the work, assigning them to his company, Synthetic Genomics, which provided much of the funding for the project. A technology watchdog group, ETC Group in Ottawa, has argued that these actions could result in a monopoly on synthesized life (Science, 15 June 2007, p. 1557), but others are not worried. Given the current climate for granting and upholding patents of this type, says Oye, "it is unlikely that Synthetic Genomics will become the Microsoft of synthetic biology." "可以肯定的是"，博克說："有趣的生物將會從凡特的實驗室中一個個冒出來"。 "One thing is sure," Boeke says. "Interesting creatures will be bubbling out of the Venter Institute's labs." -- Sincerely. --VinTW -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 114.45.57.107

推

Waterpig

05/21 08:31,

05/21 08:31

推

JanChang

05/21 08:32,

05/21 08:32

推

rabinson

05/21 08:32,

05/21 08:32