ollie'":2ew3qevt said:
In this case I think 'should' and 'do' are two different things. We've all seen a cow bred to the same bull in different years produce totally different offspring both in appearance and production.
dun
The clones are coming!
- Thread starter Brandonm2
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
- Status
In this case I think 'should' and 'do' are two different things. We've all seen a cow bred to the same bull in different years produce totally different offspring both in appearance and production.
dun
ollie'
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2005
- Messages
- 979
- Reaction score
- 4
Dun, as you know the dna contains the genetic information from any animal. If you split an embryo , both embryos have the same DNA exactly. There is no added information or information taken away. It has to be true that they breed alike. How can it not be???dun":2mudtbg0 said:
ollie'":2cunwsn9 said:
I would think that by the time the accuracy is in the .80 range that environment would be pretty well leveled out.
I don;t know or understand. But to me cloning is an expensive way to get name recognition But for consistant results I don;t think it's going to do the job.
But I'm a stubborn old phart and would like to have it explained by some weanie that is actaully doing it at the egg level.
dun
INteresting research on cloned pigs. Don;t know why it wouldn;t apply equally to any others clones
http://www.ncsu.edu/news/press_releases/03_04/113.htm
dun
http://www.ncsu.edu/news/press_releases/03_04/113.htm
dun
ollie'
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2005
- Messages
- 979
- Reaction score
- 4
Interesting Dun. I've got a friend that has been around some holstein clones and he says the same. He has even noticed some large umbilical cords and such. I am still of the opinion (until I'm proven stupid) that they would breed the same. DNA is DNA regardless of how the calf looks or preforms individually.
"Piedrahita says the benefits of cloning are better realized when the clone has offspring of its own. That's because any genetic errors are corrected, meaning that the original animal and the offspring of the clone will have the same genetic merit."
"Piedrahita says the benefits of cloning are better realized when the clone has offspring of its own. That's because any genetic errors are corrected, meaning that the original animal and the offspring of the clone will have the same genetic merit."
First off "Identical twins" Clones have the exact same DNA as the original therefore when the process of meiosis is completed that DNA splits and takes half with it in a semi random form. So it is hard to judge clones progeny against each other unless you have large contemporary groups. The part where you say " clone's semen should produce offspring exactly like the original" There are two ways to take that, A clones offspring won't be exactly like the clone. I don't think thats what you meant.
As far as clones go especially in holsteins they often won't look exactly alike due to some genes in all genomes don't have a set manifestation for example spots in holsteins. We all learn about medellian genetics but they leave alot out about the way other genes behave. Some genes are either turned on or off and aren't real regulated about what they do. When it comes to quantataive traits, epistasis, co-dominance, No dominance, delayed manifestation and gene activation it really complicates things more than mendell ever could have guessed.
aplusmnt
Well-known member
Beef11":2dh0hlwi said:
You are probably correct that the Ag world tends to lean to the right, but just because a person is on the right that does not mean they make all conservative issues important to themselves.
It could be correct to say that a lot of right winger are involved in cloning but also most of the people opposing Cloning are also from the Right side.
I can not see many far left liberals opposing cloning of Cattle, because if they took this stand they would have to oppose cloning of humans.
So my take is it is the right opposing cloning and some left and right doing it. Much like not all Liberals are against gun control even though it is the left that is against it.
Not sure any of that made sense
For the Record I am against cloning in any form be it cattle or humans. Just does not sound right.
backhoeboogie
Well-known member
aplusmnt":baockmq4 said:
ditto that for me.
Face it folks, if CB and Alice get on the same page, there's got to be something to it.
Warpaint, I didn't know you were a left wing radical right wing whacko. After all this time I would have never figured you to be that twisted.
On a serious note, I didn't know about Carson. My condolences buddy.
Jeanne - Simme Valley
Well-known member
Beefy11 wrote:
"First off "Identical twins" Clones have the exact same DNA as the original therefore when the process of meiosis is completed that DNA splits and takes half with it in a semi random form. So it is hard to judge clones progeny against each other unless you have large contemporary groups. The part where you say " clone's semen should produce offspring exactly like the original" There are two ways to take that, A clones offspring won't be exactly like the clone. I don't think thats what you meant.
I meant the clone's semen should produce like the donor's semen produces.
"As far as clones go especially in holsteins they often won't look exactly alike due to some genes in all genomes don't have a set manifestation for example spots in holsteins. We all learn about medellian genetics but they leave alot out about the way other genes behave. Some genes are either turned on or off and aren't real regulated about what they do. When it comes to quantataive traits, epistasis, co-dominance, No dominance, delayed manifestation and gene activation it really complicates things more than mendell ever could have guessed"
Dun's pig article agrees w/ the "looks & acts" different, but says they will produce like the donor of the clone. Still doesn't explain the difference in EPD's over time ??? Interesting.
"First off "Identical twins" Clones have the exact same DNA as the original therefore when the process of meiosis is completed that DNA splits and takes half with it in a semi random form. So it is hard to judge clones progeny against each other unless you have large contemporary groups. The part where you say " clone's semen should produce offspring exactly like the original" There are two ways to take that, A clones offspring won't be exactly like the clone. I don't think thats what you meant.
I meant the clone's semen should produce like the donor's semen produces.
"As far as clones go especially in holsteins they often won't look exactly alike due to some genes in all genomes don't have a set manifestation for example spots in holsteins. We all learn about medellian genetics but they leave alot out about the way other genes behave. Some genes are either turned on or off and aren't real regulated about what they do. When it comes to quantataive traits, epistasis, co-dominance, No dominance, delayed manifestation and gene activation it really complicates things more than mendell ever could have guessed"
Dun's pig article agrees w/ the "looks & acts" different, but says they will produce like the donor of the clone. Still doesn't explain the difference in EPD's over time ??? Interesting.
aplusmnt
Well-known member
Jeanne - Simme Valley":h4he9bgr said:
I did not read Duns Pig article but wouldn't it be impossible for a clone to have the same epd's because to do so it would have had to been bred to the exact same females. Doesn't the epd's get figured based on info from offspring? The genetics of the females would alter any epd's similarities.
Jeanne - Simme Valley
Well-known member
I agree.dun":32uu1rrt said:
Rustler9
Well-known member
Day's feisty Fannie was the second Longhorn cow to be cloned. Of the eight clones that survived, I can't remember exactly how many that were born, I believe there were eleven, no two have exactly the same color pattern as Feisty Fannie. She is a red brindle cow with a white underline. Some of the clones have white spots on their sides or hips, some on their fore heads. The representative from Cyagra-the company who cloned Feisty Fannie told me that they cannot reproduce the exact color patterns because of the various colors involved in a Longhorn. The clones have all of the same colors in their coats as the donor cow, the colors just aren't distributed evenly on all of the animals. There were birth weight differences in excess of 20+ lbs. in the clones. At maturity there are differences in horn lengths by several inches. Day's Feisty Fannie is the longest horned female on record as of now.
The cloning debate is ongoing in our Longhorn association as it is in the other major Longhorn association. The owners of the clones want to be able to show their genetically superior??? cattle who have been raised in a near perfect environment to produce a superior animal with other breeders' animals in the same classes. Myself as well as many other breeders don't feel that we should have to compete with these animals. I do not have a problem with someone showing their clones but I do believe that they should be shown in a class all by themselves.
I'm not sure how I feel about cloning, I personally would not do it if I had the money to do it with. I'm not knocking those who do it but still don't think that we should have to compete with them. There are too many unanswered questions about clones at this time. Will they have shorter life spans than natural, AI conceived or embryonic transferred animals? Will this carry over to their offspring and thus shorten their lives as well? Probably not but do we really know? The Longhorn breed is a breed known for longevity, are we going to mess this up?
I feel that sometime down the road many of us may have a descendent of a clone in our herd. I don't know that I'm opposed to having a grand daughter of a cloned animal in my herd but I want to know about it. It needs to be designated on the animal's papers as I'm sure that it will be. The guy who had Feisty Fannie cloned has also cloned one of the clones. From what little I've read each time an animal is cloned the animal is weakened. It kind of seems as if these people just try to see how far they can go. I read where scientist had merged cells from a duck and quail and had hatched a quail with a duck's beak. Ok, so it can be done-but why?? Why do we need a quail with a duck's beak?
I've heard that many clones have to be destroyed because they have enlarged organs and other problems. I personally think that I'd rather concentrate on breeding my own animals in order to get that superior specimen but to each his own.
Here's a link to an interesting article written by a fellow Longhorn breeder and geneticist:
http://home.austin.rr.com/doublehelix/Cloning.html
The cloning debate is ongoing in our Longhorn association as it is in the other major Longhorn association. The owners of the clones want to be able to show their genetically superior??? cattle who have been raised in a near perfect environment to produce a superior animal with other breeders' animals in the same classes. Myself as well as many other breeders don't feel that we should have to compete with these animals. I do not have a problem with someone showing their clones but I do believe that they should be shown in a class all by themselves.
I'm not sure how I feel about cloning, I personally would not do it if I had the money to do it with. I'm not knocking those who do it but still don't think that we should have to compete with them. There are too many unanswered questions about clones at this time. Will they have shorter life spans than natural, AI conceived or embryonic transferred animals? Will this carry over to their offspring and thus shorten their lives as well? Probably not but do we really know? The Longhorn breed is a breed known for longevity, are we going to mess this up?
I feel that sometime down the road many of us may have a descendent of a clone in our herd. I don't know that I'm opposed to having a grand daughter of a cloned animal in my herd but I want to know about it. It needs to be designated on the animal's papers as I'm sure that it will be. The guy who had Feisty Fannie cloned has also cloned one of the clones. From what little I've read each time an animal is cloned the animal is weakened. It kind of seems as if these people just try to see how far they can go. I read where scientist had merged cells from a duck and quail and had hatched a quail with a duck's beak. Ok, so it can be done-but why?? Why do we need a quail with a duck's beak?
I've heard that many clones have to be destroyed because they have enlarged organs and other problems. I personally think that I'd rather concentrate on breeding my own animals in order to get that superior specimen but to each his own.
Here's a link to an interesting article written by a fellow Longhorn breeder and geneticist:
http://home.austin.rr.com/doublehelix/Cloning.html
It makes no difference if the tissue is from a clone or an original.(you might be thinking of dubbing cassette tapes) The problems from cloning stem from the activation process not the actual cloning. In other words the cloned animals problems are man caused as opposed being genetic.
I wouldn't worry about competeing with clones if i was you. Cloning keeps you in the same place and doesn't allow for advancement. Just keep breeding for better animals and in ten years the top cow now won't be tops anymore.
Marquess Arrow is a site with pictures of several of the longhorns they have cloned. Overall, the phenotypic resemblance is remarkable. I am not a longhorn breeder, so can't speak to horn growth or other performance traits.
http://www.maranch.com/Clones/Clones.htm
the biggest group of cloned calves, is I think on this link:
http://www.maranch.com/Flower%20Collect ... ection.htm
From what I see, cloning is where ET was when it first came out. There are still some kinks to be worked out, but the technology improves with each passing year. I remember when ET seemed far-fetched and the risks too great.
One other thing I'd like to point out: There is a difference in results from the companies that do cloning, full time, with fully-trained professional staff and the results from many Universities, where the procedures are experimental and/or performed by graduate students as part of their research.
http://www.maranch.com/Clones/Clones.htm
the biggest group of cloned calves, is I think on this link:
http://www.maranch.com/Flower%20Collect ... ection.htm
From what I see, cloning is where ET was when it first came out. There are still some kinks to be worked out, but the technology improves with each passing year. I remember when ET seemed far-fetched and the risks too great.
One other thing I'd like to point out: There is a difference in results from the companies that do cloning, full time, with fully-trained professional staff and the results from many Universities, where the procedures are experimental and/or performed by graduate students as part of their research.
How many offspring does it take to produce 80 percent accuracy?
Lets say its 50. Do you think a bull evaluated by his first 50 offspring would have identical EPDs if evaluated by his next 50 offspring? I don't think so especially if the groups came out of different herds. I think it would take a far larger sample to get equivalent EPDs. As the accuracy increases to 98% or so I would be shocked if the epds didn't get much closer. I would attribute the differences thus far to random chance. The differences in appearance would likely be secondary to environment, photographer, lighting, etc.
Lets say its 50. Do you think a bull evaluated by his first 50 offspring would have identical EPDs if evaluated by his next 50 offspring? I don't think so especially if the groups came out of different herds. I think it would take a far larger sample to get equivalent EPDs. As the accuracy increases to 98% or so I would be shocked if the epds didn't get much closer. I would attribute the differences thus far to random chance. The differences in appearance would likely be secondary to environment, photographer, lighting, etc.
BAGTIC
Well-known member
"It would be irresponsible to do anything that might increase the likelihood of producing a disabled child."
Then should people who carry 'defective' genes not be allowed to have children? Should women over 30 not be permitted to have children?
The debate about cloning is not one based on science or reason. It is based solely on ignorance and superstition and trying to convince the religious zealots is a waste of time and effort. They don't want to know the facts because they have already made up their minds.
Then should people who carry 'defective' genes not be allowed to have children? Should women over 30 not be permitted to have children?
The debate about cloning is not one based on science or reason. It is based solely on ignorance and superstition and trying to convince the religious zealots is a waste of time and effort. They don't want to know the facts because they have already made up their minds.
BAGTIC
Well-known member
"The question in my mind is this:Is it moral for someone to set in labs and put genes and cells together to artificially put life into an animal or human.In my opinion,it is not a moral thing to do."
Perhaps that is not the right question.
Perhaps the question should be does anyone have the right to impose their sense of morality on everyone else?
Some childless people might be willing to take a chance if they knew there was a 90% chance of having a happy healthy baby.
Personally if some people don't want to clone children or cattle that is their business. If others do want to, that is their business.
The governm,ent and the preachers should stay out of it and leave the decision to those involved.
Perhaps that is not the right question.
Perhaps the question should be does anyone have the right to impose their sense of morality on everyone else?
Some childless people might be willing to take a chance if they knew there was a 90% chance of having a happy healthy baby.
Personally if some people don't want to clone children or cattle that is their business. If others do want to, that is their business.
The governm,ent and the preachers should stay out of it and leave the decision to those involved.
- Status
