Pretty much every transformation experiment starts with E.coli. The ones used are non-pathenogenic and total wusses compared to normal gut E.coli

Isn't the Kodak one displaying the old company name, Eastman Kodak Corp.?

Actually nature has done a pretty mediocre job. And you are assuming that such changes would be irreversible and germline transmissible, neither of which is assured.

But if you wait for absolute certainty, you'll be waiting forever. The complexity of these systems pretty much ensures you can never be absolutely certain about anything.

Ahh sorry, I misinterpreted your post as a hypothetical "If they could remove the allele" argument. And actually, inserting the alleles isn't all that challenging (so long as you aren't picky about where they end up); I'd have to say taking them out would be more problematic.

I'm very curious how they quantified the behavioral traits, as those have always been extremely tricky and contentious to identify from DNA.

Well, assuming we have the ability to remove alleles as we like, wouldn't we also be able to add them back in, as we like? As long as there is a record of what the allele was like originally, it could be re-created and inserted back in pretty easily. Again, assuming we have the ability to adjust alleles to our…

All arguments about being able to predict exact outcomes aside, you need to decide what "no negative effects" means. Does this mean negative side effects, or the loss of positive effects? For example, xeroderma pigmentosum is a disease that affects DNA damage repair and prevents sufferers from being able to go out in…

Not surprising, given how many folks tend to ignore the techniques for slowing that down. Same as antibiotic resistant pathogens, really.

I always quote fictional mathematicians in my biology papers, it amuses my reviewers :)

I completely agree. Just because we have the techniques doesn't mean people use them, which is unfortunate but not surprising.

Oh dang, I done been told. I bet To Some get They Say to do the peer review!

The enzyme that fixes CO2 (and O2 if you aren't careful) is called Rubisco, and it is the reason that grasses use PEP carboxylase. This type of photosynthesis (called C4 photosynthesis as compared to the C3 photosynthesis used by other plants) doesn't exist to scavenge carbon dioxide, it exists to stop Rubsico from…

I had drinks with one of the researchers in charge of the sequencing and alignment part of the project, and he had said one of the hardest part of the project was getting enough DNA from each critter to sequence it. A lot of the prokaryotes they sampled can't be cultured, so all the DNA they had was the DNA that was…

Sure, though humans aren't naturally that sensitive to vibrations to be able to detect stuff like that. It would be kinda cool if we could, I'd know when my boss is coming to yell at me for commenting on these articles instead of working. So for them to be sensitive enough to detect people, you'd have to do some…

Yes. as has been pointed out many times in this article, haha. Not really sure what you are trying to point out with it though, so...

I know people like bringing the cordyceps up over and over again, but it's not really an fair comparison either. An ant brain has a very small number of neurons, meaning that the number of neurons related to each function is a lot smaller, so there is less the fungus needs to do to provoke a response. Additionally,…

I don't really buy the part about them being mobile though. Even if we go with the power source being the the decomposition of the host (for which the fungus would be competing with the bacteria in the human's gut, which outnumber the invading fungus a billion to one at least), the amount of different organs involved…

Well. originally this rover was only supposed to last around 90 days, so I don't imagine they thought it was was that big of a deal. Also, a fan wouldn't work because the atmosphere there is so thin, there's not a whole lot of air to move, and the moving parts of the fan would certainly get gummed up. Mars dust is…