×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Cloned Cat Not a 'Carbon Copy'

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the no-two-cats-are-alike dept.

Science 480

bbsguru writes "When Texas A&M researchers announced the first Cloned Kitty about a year ago, everyone expected to see a Multiplicity-style pair of cats by now. Not so! The clone is genetically identical, but in many other ways totally a different cat. This CNN Story has details."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

480 comments

A different cat, yes... (5, Funny)

DarklordJonnyDigital (522978) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133763)

It's both the same cat AND a totally different cat. You changed the results by observing them.

Re:A different cat, yes... (2, Insightful)

slimordium (613217) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133809)

So our challenge is that we as humans need to first be able to create matter, then cloning will be irrelevant.

I guess.. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133962)

Now you can have your cat and eat it too! Ha!

-Alf

so it is not a copy cat? (3, Insightful)

amentia (142487) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133764)

Everything is not in the genes!

Re:so it is not a copy cat? (1)

amentia (142487) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133791)

This is good, this is something I can refer to when I speak with my dad or some other conservative it-is-all-in-the-genes-person.

Tabula rasa, people are blank papers when they're born. Our environment form us.

Re:so it is not a copy cat? (5, Insightful)

frozenray (308282) | more than 11 years ago | (#5134023)

> Tabula rasa, people are blank papers when they're born. Our environment form us.

The extreme points of view ("blank slate" and "all in the genes") have been thoroughly discredited by scientific research. We are both a product of our genes and our environment.

May I suggest reading Steven Pinker's "The Blank Slate" [amazon.com] for an intelligent discussion of the subject? The book is worth its money IMO.

Impossible to... (3, Interesting)

e8johan (605347) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133768)

This pretty much shows that it will be impossible to use cloning (as we know it today) to raise the dead.

However a human teleporter and a little sniffing on the transmission line would probably do the trick. However, the two individuals would not be exposed to the same surroundings and diverge pretty soon.

ST:TNG Episode "Second Chances" comes to mind (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133977)

When the crew finds a "second" Riker on some planet.. He is the product of a transporter mishap 9 years prior. Because of their extreme different surroundings and experiences (The riker being on the Enterprise, the "second" Riker roughing it out on this planet for 9 years), they are really different people.

Re:Impossible to... (5, Funny)

dubstop (136484) | more than 11 years ago | (#5134033)

Like Ryker's transporter double.

I can't remember the episode, but I was very impressed that the double managed to survive alone for years without going insane. There can't be many things that are worse than being alone, without any form of human contact for many years, but here's a few that are close:
  1. being stuck alone and being Ryker.
  2. being stuck alone except for Ryker.
  3. being Ryker.

After contemplating the magnitude of such a tragedy, I don't even have the energy to do the ???, Profit! thing.

Use RPN (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133769)

It's faster, and less prone to errors. Another example:

(5 / (2 + 9)) ^ (8 - 5) =

16 keystrokes in alg or

5 Enter 9 Enter 2 + / 8 Enter 5 - ^

12 keystrokes

well... (2, Interesting)

geekoid (135745) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133774)

everyone except the scientists.
However people expecting clones to remember the stuff from the original, really make me wonder how we manage to get any technology at all.

Re:well... (3, Interesting)

nomadic (141991) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133812)

Nobody was expecting the same memories; they were, however, expecting the same behavior patterns.

I admit I was surprised. More and more behavioral aspects of an organism are being defined by genetics these days. Look at how identical twins raised in different environments exhibit similar behavioral patterns, down to the occupations they choose. Nature vs. nurture's an ongoing battle, but over the past few years it's seemed that nature would win.

Re:well... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133888)

they were, however, expecting the same behavior patterns.
Why on Earth would they expect that? Behaviour is clearly influenced by environment.

Nature vs. nurture's an ongoing battle, but over the past few years it's seemed that nature would win.
What bosh.

Re:well... (2, Insightful)

Jace of Fuse! (72042) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133974)

Why on Earth would they expect that? Behaviour is clearly influenced by environment.

That issue is hardly clearly one way or the other. The Nature vs. Nurture battle has been going on for a long time. It's very naive of you to believe you are so special that you are privi to the answer most psychologists would love to have. How much research have YOU personally done in that field? None? You probably haven't done any. When you say "Behaviour is clearly influenced by environment" in that context, you are implying that you believe nature has no role. Anybody who has studied this topic at all would immediately cite reasons to strongely disagree with you.

There are people who study this day in day out and make a living trying to figure out the answer to that question, and even THEY don't know with enough certainty to say one way or the other. Oh, sure, some of them will take a stance on one or the other side, but in the end they'll still admit they aren't really sure. It isn't clear, and you clearly do not know enough to have a valid hypothesis. The only thing you have is an uneducated opinion.

But then, you were too busy being an anonymous troll to make any kind of sense, huh?

Re:well... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133989)

When you say "Behaviour is clearly influenced by environment" in that context, you are implying that you believe nature has no role.
Don't be silly. Of course I'm implying no such thing. I stated that behaviour is influenced by environment, and so it is. Read any of the literature! Both nature and nurture have their influence, and no-one in the field is looking to say that either one has no influence, as it is simple to prove that both have an effect.

But then, you were too busy being a troll to make any kind of sense, huh?

Re:well... (1)

thannine (576719) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133993)

When you say "Behaviour is clearly influenced by environment" in that context, you are implying that you believe nature has no role.

You really think that's what he means?

He just said that environment influences, thus you shouldn't expect the same behaviour. What part of that was so hard to understand ?

Re:well... (1)

dabootsie (590376) | more than 11 years ago | (#5134009)

Anybody who has studied this topic at all would immediately cite reasons to strongely disagree with you.

Wouldn't the fact that you don't cite reasons mean that you haven't studied the topic at all, then? In which case, wouldn't that make you the one trolling? :-P
How much research have YOU personally done in that field?

Yes... but (4, Interesting)

The Tyro (247333) | more than 11 years ago | (#5134028)

people apparently left out the "nurture" part of the equation entirely.

It seems to me an incredible stretch that people actually believed their pet's behavior/personality was hard-coded in the DNA.... but maybe that's just my studied-the-hard-sciences-all-my-life bias.

Behaviors are very complex things... both genetic tendency and environmental interaction play important roles. Even in psychiatric disorders that have strong genetic links (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder) having both parents (or an identical twin) afflicted will only buy the child or sibling a 50-60% chance (give or take 10%) of developing the disorder.

Yes, genes are the building blocks of our bodies... but you have to give nurture its chance at bat.

Re:well... (1)

LittleBigLui (304739) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133827)

by remembering what both our parents knew and combining that knowledge to something new. (and passing our knowledge-genes to our kids.)

They named the clone "CC"... (3, Funny)

tooloftheoligarchy (557158) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133779)

...for "Carbon Copy"... no wonder the thing is thinner thatn it's "sibling"... it's got identity issues and they've triggered an eating disorder.

Nature vs. Nurture (3, Interesting)

DJPenguin (17736) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133782)

It's the old Nature vs. Nurture debate - I would imagine these cats were treated differently, and this could account for differences in behaviour.

It might however have been a different story if both cats had been cloned before birth to make them identical twins. The older cat in the article would have had to change it's behaviour when the new one came along.

It just goes to show the genetics doesn't define "who we are".

Re:Nature vs. Nurture (4, Interesting)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133798)

But its not personality.

The coats are different colors. How is this possible?

I know when they cloaned dolly, the clone experienced premature aging. The theory is that when each cell divides it stores the information about the division internally. After so many divides the cells began to not regenerate as much and this causes aging. Perhaps something similiar happened and caused the hairs to not display in full colors due to false information stored from the other cat that was implanted in the egg cell of the clone.

Anyway this is a mystery and alot more research is needed on this.

Re:Nature vs. Nurture (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133850)

>The coats are different colors. How is this possible?

Huh, you know that children born of mothers who
drink during pregnancy have a heavy risk of
mental or physical disorders ? So the environment
begins before the birth, you see.

Natural twins grow in the same womb. The
environment is quasi identical (apart from the
position in the womb, of course)

Even if the mother is the same for the 2 cloned
animals, it's not at the same time. This could
explain the greater difference between
artificial clones vs the natural ones.

Re:Nature vs. Nurture (5, Informative)

ishark (245915) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133875)

The coats are different colors. How is this possible?

The color of a cat's coat is a much more complex matter than what it seems. While, of course, genetics applies, there are a lot of "minor" details which are not completely understood.
Even in "purebreed" cats you can have a lot of fluctuations in the fur color (there are lots of variations in the "blue" you can see in the Chartreux). While some of them are genetically transferred (and thus selective breeding can enhance/cancel them), for some of them the situation is not so clear, an example being the tortie-shell females (black/red or blue/cream), where the distribution of the color doesn't seem much controllable. From what they show with Cc it also seems that the tabby stripes can show up more or less depending on the individual.

Some more info on the main cat color genes can be found here [fanciers.com]
and even more here [netpets.com] .

Re:Nature vs. Nurture (1)

Firethorn (177587) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133801)

What suprised me was the missing colors, the mother was a three color (brown, tan, gold)calico, while CC is white with gray strips.

A different pattern wouldn't suprise me, after all, twins don't have the same fingerprints. But I'd have expected them to at least have the same hair colors...

I guess this means that the colors of cats depends more on development/womb conditions than genetics.

Re:Nature vs. Nurture (2, Informative)

nycbrujah (578979) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133988)

Some cat fur is lighter or darker depending upon then environment that they grow up in. Darker for colder climates, and lighter for warmer climates. I'm not sure if it works that way with Calicos though.
Calico is mostly a female only gene, the odd male that is born a Calico is usual sterile.
I'm surprised they chose a Calico to clone. It's possible because a Calico needs a certain set of genes, most recessive, and they might have been easier to isolate.

Re:Nature vs. Nurture (1)

blue trane (110704) | more than 11 years ago | (#5134011)

Or: genetics determines the range of possible coat colors/patterns.

Given a specific cat's genes, one should (eventually) be able to predict the coat results in different environmental conditions.

(So it isn't really that nurture "wins"...)

Re:Nature vs. Nurture (1)

johnraphone (624518) | more than 11 years ago | (#5134004)

I aggree with you that the enviorment does play a role in the behavior and attitude of it and not the DNA. Question: Do you think motherhood or fatherhood is built into the DNA? I think it is because somehow animals in the wild seem to keep having babies. :)

Not a carbon copy...? (4, Funny)

Anonvmous Coward (589068) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133783)

So.. it's silicon based then? Well, that means they can colonize radioactive worlds, but their population growth is half.

Re:Not a carbon copy...? (4, Funny)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133819)

"So.. it's silicon based then? Well, that means they can colonize radioactive worlds, but their population growth is half. "

No no, it's the first silicon based pussy that anybody cared about.

Hmm. You know, it's just like poker. You can't beat a Master of Orion reference with a porn reference, even with the double meaning bonus. My only ace would be if I could find a surprisingly appropriate Doctor Who reference.

As expected really (4, Insightful)

terrencefw (605681) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133793)

I think that this is pretty much what we all expected... far more nurture than nature. Like the article says, it's the personality that we like about our animals, not it's genetic makeup.

As for the company which promises to provide you with a replacement pet which looks just like the old one, they admit that it's won't have the same personality. 'Scuse me, but isn't a pet that looks the same but with a different personality just what you'd find down the local animal sanctuary or pet store? (And far cheaper!)

Re:As expected really (1)

julesh (229690) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133877)

Yeah, but it even looks different. Not that that's surprising either, seing as its been long known that a cat's markings are the results of random variations, similar to the way a human's fingerprint is determined.

Re:As expected really (1)

Jace of Fuse! (72042) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133982)

similar to the way a human's fingerprint is determined.

Now that is interesting. I've never heard that a human fingerprint is based on something other than genetics. Your statement implies a pair of cloned humans would have different finger prints.

Since I'm unaware of any cloned humans, do you have any information on this? Or is it just a standing theory?

Re:As expected really (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5134010)

Since I'm unaware of any cloned humans, do you have any information on this?
Identical twins have different fingerprints.

Re:As expected really (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5134025)

Identical twins are natural clones, and they have different fingerprints.

Re:As expected really (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5134006)

"But daddy! I dont want a RE-Pet!"

Sorry... I couldn't help myself... whenever you can, quote a bad arnold movie.

Hear that sound? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133794)

That's the sound of God chuckling as he walks back to the library.

basic flaw (3, Insightful)

slimordium (613217) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133797)

The definition of "clone' as used is incorrect, that is probably where the problem comes from in the first place. Redefine that word retroactively and perhaps avoid the whole mess from the start. Clone? I do not think "it" will ever be possible. Are we any closer to understanding the complete universe/multiverse/galaxy much less how our DNA works? HA! Arrogant bastards. In 100 hundred years or so people will laugh at our "clone' ideas. Snicker. I laugh proactively of course. But I reserve the right to change my opinion.

why on earth would you expect a carbon copy ? (4, Interesting)

psycho_tinman (313601) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133800)

Its been established that nature plays a lesser role than nurture in the personality of a human.. obviously, the same must apply to animals as well..

No matter even if you clone an Einstein, they're not going to pop out spouting theorems, it just doesnt work that way.. from a purely research oriented perspective, though, it might be interesting to have an Einstein clone, simply to see how he may use his innate talents along ANOTHER field of science (or maybe not even a science, he might have been a GREAT musician, for all we know)..

For any person, most things we do are not innate but rather taught.. Would Mozart have started composing from the age of 4 if he hadnt had parents who encouraged him ? I doubt it.. With a clone, the only thing you CAN get is the potential to achieve the same things as the "original" (I hate using that term, but whatever)..

So, finally, in typical Slashdot-style, let me ask.. Is this really news ? (yeah, it is, it probably helped correct a lot of peoples misconceptions about the cloning process, which is GREAT, but it should have been obvious from the start)

Re:why on earth would you expect a carbon copy ? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133854)

...it might be interesting to have an Einstein clone, simply to see how he may use his innate talents along ANOTHER field of science (or maybe not even a science, he might have been a GREAT musician, for all we know)..

Alfred Einstein [mozartproject.org] , Albert's brother, was a very influential, and quite brilliant, musicologist.

Re:why on earth would you expect a carbon copy ? (1)

MonTemplar (174120) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133856)

So, finally, in typical Slashdot-style, let me ask.. Is this really news ?

Well, at least with this story we actually have pictures of the clone, and some proof that it actually exists.

Re:why on earth would you expect a carbon copy ? (1)

cenobyte (19825) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133858)

I don't think this is news to biologists, or cognitive scientists.

Genes play a part, but nurture plays a part two. The proof is sitting in plain sight. Identical twins are genetically identical: they are naturally occurring human clones. However, identical twins are also different people. They share some traits, but still are very different. And identical twins also share a lot of their environment: a clone (a clearer term: "identical twin shifted in time", ITSIT?) will have less common environment, and hence be likely to be more different.

Re:why on earth would you expect a carbon copy ? (2, Interesting)

Jace of Fuse! (72042) | more than 11 years ago | (#5134020)

The question isn't if nuture has some role, because it obviously does. The question is, does nature ALSO have some role, as well. How much does each have? Does genetics effect one's behavior at all. Can you inherit violent or criminal tendacies? (i.e. if your father was a violent man, will you be a violent man even if you've never met him?)

As far as I know there is no clear cut answer. I've literally watched two "experts" go back and forth on the topic for very long periods of time.

Re:why on earth would you expect a carbon copy ? (2, Insightful)

sql*kitten (1359) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133940)

Its been established that nature plays a lesser role than nurture in the personality of a human.. obviously, the same must apply to animals as well..

That much is intuitively obvious... what is less obvious is why the cats have different colored fur. After all, human twins are often physically indistinguishable.

Re:why on earth would you expect a carbon copy ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5134012)

Homosexuality is a decision or environmential rather than genetic... :-)

Seems like when you open that bag, you open a bag that a lot of alternative lifestyle people dont want it opened.

Same as the kid that is evil/grows up to be a criminal... it's not genetic.. but how you were raised coupled with personal decisions.

This is all very well, but... (5, Funny)

Doctor Hu (628508) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133803)

...when are they going to clone the same cat multiple times, to check out the "9 lives" theory?

--
Yes, we're at a coffee break here. How did you guess?

Re:This is all very well, but... (1)

larien (5608) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133947)

Reminds me of a joke I heard: "Cats have 9 lives. Which makes them ideal for conducting medical experiments on."

label me troll if you want (-1, Troll)

lingqi (577227) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133804)

but I'd take a beowulf cluster of cloned natalie portman in hot grits any day - even if every one of them is slightly different from the original...

Cats? (1)

dostick (69711) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133805)

Who cares about cats?
They are cloning humans already!
Make a story about that!

Re:Cats? (1)

MonTemplar (174120) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133845)

Who cares about cats?
They are cloning humans already!
Make a story about that!


Alledgedly - we're all still waiting for proof of the existense of these clones...

Extremely Interesting (4, Interesting)

ender81b (520454) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133815)

I, personally, find this fascinating. They claim the feline in question is a perfect clone yet it is totally different personality wise/color wise/body shape than it's 'parent'.

Wow. Cool. I say this because it goes to show you that their must literally be hundreds of thousands of variables that effect how an organism turns out - not just genes. While the personality of the cat could be expected to differ - based on how it was raised - it is really quite cool how the new cat is an entirely different color/shape than its parent. I am not a biologist or scientist by any means but this surely has to change how we view how organisms grow and develop. Why is the color/shape of this cat different than it's parent? I imagine the more complex the organism the more variations you can get from a clone of it.

It also brings up interesting evolutionary questions, i.e. if an organisms shape/color/behavior isn't completely determined by genes how, exactly, does this effect how evolution takes place? I am taking an anthropology class right now and the view presented in that class at least is that Culture is a extra-somatic (read: non genes) form of adaptation. Primates, whales, dolphins, sea otters, etc, etc all exhibit traits and culture. but this doesn't fit into a culture - why is the cat's color/shape different than the parent? Does enviroment somehow effect what shape/color the cat turns out?

What does this mean for human cloning? Probably that if you get a clone of yourself it will look/act very little like you.

I also have to agree with the human society spokesperson. If you want a cat/dog/iguana/snake/whatever run down to the local animal shelter and pick up the next one scheduled to be euthanized. Don't spend 5 figures trying to ressurect fluffy for god's sake.

Re:Extremely Interesting (1)

icestorm487 (630698) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133905)

actually if I remember correctly, the reason why the "identical" cats have different coloring is because the coloring is affected by the temperature of the womb. Temperature has a lot to do with not only the fur of cats but the sex of some reptiles also.

Re:Extremely Interesting (4, Informative)

cosyne (324176) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133994)

it goes to show you that their must literally be hundreds of thousands of variables that effect how an organism turns out - not just genes ... this surely has to change how we view how organisms grow and develop. Why is the color/shape of this cat different than it's parent? I imagine the more complex the organism the more variations you can get from a clone of it.

I doubt that very many developmental biologists are shocked by the clone having a different color. Even if the cat embryos went through the exact same conditions in the womb, there are some parts of biological development which are, basically, random. (The way that human visual sensors map to the visual cortex in the back of the brain is random and bizarre). Even if Cc was carried by Rainbow's mom, its unlikely that the mother cat followed the same sleep cycle, ate the exact same catfood, experienced the same environmental conditions (from temperature to gravitational variations), etc.

It also brings up interesting evolutionary questions, i.e. if an organisms shape/color/behavior isn't completely determined by genes how, exactly, does this effect how evolution takes place?

Evolution is random to begin with, so you have to consider the averages. It's not literally that Bob the Tortise has a longer neck so it eats more of the food and Dave the Tortise dies. Given a set of genes common to a certian group (Bob's family), even with some random variations, that group could, more often than not, fare better than another group with a different set of genes (and random variations around those genes). So eventually Bob's group does better and those genes permeate the gene pool. Random phenotypical (outward characteristics as opposed to genetic characteristics) variation won't be passed on, so if it gives a particular individual some advantage, good for them, but it doesn't effect the population. If the phenotypical variation is harmful and the creature's genes don't give it enough advantages to keep up, that individual won't pass it's genes on as much as the rest of the population, so they become less common.

And cultural adaptation is a whole nother matter, although you could look at it in a natural-selection context. Will our culture be able to adapt to it's surroundings well enough to avaoid getting killed by other cultures, or from within, or by destroying the habitat? And if our culture as we know it is destroyed, is that just a radical mutation, similar to the way that a few drug resistant bacteria can survive a penicillin dose and breed a new drug-resistant strain?
But that's a different discussion.

Re:Extremely Interesting (1)

jpop32 (596022) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133998)

Primates, whales, dolphins, sea otters, etc, etc all exhibit traits and culture. but this doesn't fit into a culture - why is the cat's color/shape different than the parent? Does enviroment somehow effect what shape/color the cat turns out?

Actually, the reason for that, as I understood it, is in the technology of the process itself. When they clone a cell, the use a donor egg cell and replace its genetic material with that of the being being (hah! :-)) cloned.

But, important part in the growth of the egg cell are the RNA and other chemicals present in the cell. Since those come from the host cell the development of the being encoded in the genes is very much dependent on the host cell used in the process.

Thus, the cloned being ends up different than the being it was cloned from.

I don't get it (5, Interesting)

peterpi (585134) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133817)

I am genetically identical today to how I was yesterday, but I expect I'll do loads of different stuff.

Re:I don't get it (5, Funny)

Inflatable Hippo (202606) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133913)

> I am genetically identical today to how I was yesterday, but I expect I'll do loads of different stuff.

We change a great deal over time. For example I was blond and blue eyed until I was two and now I'm grey/green eyed and dark haired (what's left of it)

My mother asked a Nurse about this at the time (1960's) and was told that changes like this are quite normal over time.

This did confuse my mother somewhat since it happened to me over a period of 5 minutes when I was left outside a shop with our dog.

Re:I don't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5134022)

Hey! FUNNY!!!

Yes, but what are the similarities? (3, Interesting)

shamir_k (222154) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133820)

Even the coat pattern of the two cats is different!! Then what exactly are the similarities. I have heard stories of human twins leading very similar lives. Genese definitely do have a big effect on personality and behaviour. So the interesting question is : what are the similarities between two cats with the same DNA, but very different environments (and ages). Could shed some new and interesting light on the old nurture vs. nature arguements. Even for humans .

Re:Yes, but what are the similarities? (1)

CrosseyedPainless (27978) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133968)

Human twins may lead very similar lives, but then, human twins are born together, generally live in the same environment at the same exact time, have most of the same experiences, and they have each other for reinforcment. If you take away all those factors, as in this case, you are left with only the genetic factors. It seems genetic factors just don't have that much effect, relatively, on behavior, which isn't really that surprising.

Have you ever spent a lot of time around identical twins? At first, they seem, well, identical. After six months of daily exposure, they won't even look alike to you, or even act alike.

The follow-on research (3, Interesting)

hussar (87373) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133823)

What will be interesting is the follow-on research to determine why the two cats (or any two cloned cats) are not the same. Using clones, they have removed the DNA as a variable. The differences that resulted must therefore be due to other factors. What the other factors are and how they effect the end result should then become the central question.

My guess is that the end analysis will be that these other factors are too many and too widely variable to be consistently controlled.

Change of API (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133825)

Not a Carbon API for a Cat ? Upgrade to Cacoa for full MacOS X Jaguar support.

Re:Change of API (1, Funny)

MonTemplar (174120) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133890)

Not a Carbon API for a Cat ? Upgrade to Cacoa for full MacOS X Jaguar support.

You misunderstand the nature of Cats. They have no need of an API, as they interface to the computer by directing their pet Human(s) instead. :)

Re:Change of API (1)

LizardKing (5245) | more than 11 years ago | (#5134014)

[chris@phuq]$ tail cat.m

int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
id cat = [[Cat alloc] init];
[cat setLocation:vet];

return 0;
}

[chris@phuq]$ gcc -Wall -o cat cat.m -lobjc
gcc: 44: cannot find cat

It's all good (2, Interesting)

hdparm (575302) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133828)

After all, clones won't be a boring copies of their originals.

I would appreciate, though if somebody here can explain why doesn't same genetic pattern produce same phisycal characteristics. It's obvious that behaviour is influenced by some other factors, as well but phisycal differences seem ilogical. Thanks.

Re:It's all good (2, Interesting)

IncarnationTwo (457191) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133869)

Simple explanation could be: diet.

Basicly your body is composed of materials you have eaten. If you eat different things, your body must build itself with different materials. I hardly would call it a suprise if a clone of a white haired person is cloned and the clone turns out to be brunette, if the brunette can not gain the needed resources (titanium if I remember right.) to grow white hair.

And again, I am not suprised at all if a person who actively pursues sports and eats healthy is thin and the other who eats in McDonalds and watches tv is not, wether or not they have the same genes.

Re:It's all good (3, Interesting)

halny (628748) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133969)

I don't see anything illogical about this. Try baking three cakes using the same recipe. Chances of them being *identical* are rather small.

It would be theoretically possible to estimate information capacity of DNA molecue (after all it isn't infinite). I don't know how big it would be, but I don't know why would anyone believe DNA could store information about everything.

cnn/slashdot (1, Offtopic)

schematix (533634) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133840)

Has anyone else ever noticed that almost all of the articles on cnn's technology or science and space sections always end up on slashdot and those that don't usually are on cnn after being on /.? Or am I just imagining this?

Re:cnn/slashdot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133893)

The slashdot/copy problem is an inherited genetic anomaly. However the CNN copy problem is lazy investigative reporters.

not necessarily nature vs. nurture (2, Insightful)

Megasphaera Elsdenii (54465) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133849)

It can very well be somatic mutations that have rendered them different. I.e., there are a number of mutations in cells during foetal development, which result in phenotypic differences that are not reflected in the genotype. And then there is nurture in the sense of womb conditions -- may not have been the same. Lastly, even my identical twin daugthers are very different, so pretty much anything goes.

First Cats...then slashdot! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133883)

I want the ORIGINAL cat err...slashdot back!

twins already know this (1)

lambsonic (512680) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133889)

I have an identical twin, and I could have told you the outcome.

BTW, I never complain about duplicate articles.

The ghastly truth! (4, Funny)

MonTemplar (174120) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133908)

'What are we going to do tonight, Rainbow?'
'The same thing we do every night, CC - try to take over the World!'

You honestly thing it was the Human's idea to clone the Cat? You fools! It's part of their Masterplan to rise in vast numbers, and cast aside the enemy Dogs once and for all! Then we will be their obedient slaves - forever! :)

Re:The ghastly truth! (2, Funny)

Xpilot (117961) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133957)

They cloned a sheep first. Does this mean there'll be a ruling hierarchy? Sheep->Cats->People

Re:The ghastly truth! (2, Funny)

MonTemplar (174120) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133992)

They cloned a sheep first. Does this mean there'll be a ruling hierarchy? Sheep->Cats->People

More likely, an alliance of some kind. The sheep have already attained control of most of New Zealand, after all. :)

moron cloned monIE, blogs, frauds, etc... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133911)

accouNTing we will (continue) to goo.

Staff of S.E.C. Is Said to Dilute Rule Changes
By STEPHEN LABATON with JONATHAN D. GLATER

WASHINGTON, Jan. 21 -- The staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission plans to recommend that the agency soften proposed rules that would impose new obligations on lawyers and accountants, government officials said today.

After an onslaught of lobbying, the commission will complete work this week on regulatory proposals that were required under a law passed by Congress nearly six months ago to address a spate of corporate scandals.

Earlier proposals had been intended to instill investor confidence by imposing the new regulations. The rules would have required corporate lawyers, for instance, to report to regulators if they failed to persuade managers to fix potential securities law violations. The proposals would also have restricted accountants from auditing the same tax shelters they created. And corporations would have been required to spell out in more precise detail how much they paid their accounting firms for auditing and consulting services

But some of the toughest proposals appear to be dead, watered down or postponed, S.E.C. officials said today. Critics attributed the shift to heavy lobbying from prominent law firms, bar associations and some leading accounting firms and trade groups.

"This is very disappointing," said Lynn Turner, a former chief accountant at the commission during the Clinton administration who is now a professor of accounting at Colorado State University. "We've had Enron, Tyco, WorldCom. We've had the most tumultuous year ever in corporate America. And despite all of that, the commission is softening, rather than toughening, the rules in favor of the attorneys and auditors to the great detriment of investors. To me, it's just amazing."

Officials said the provisions had been changed from earlier drafts after meetings with the commissioners, including Harvey L. Pitt, who has remained as chairman of the agency more than two months after announcing his resignation. Last month, President Bush announced his selection of William H. Donaldson to succeed Mr. Pitt, but Mr. Donaldson has yet to be nominated formally for the post.

Mr. Pitt played an active role in drafting the new rules. Before his resignation, he was the subject of intense criticism from members of Congress, who said his actions suggested that he remained too close to his former clients in the accounting business.

look for va.msn.?net?, sticker: (VAST) [trustworthycomputing.com] ?

you go george, harvIE, robbIE, lairIE,... kevin? you are the wonz, areN'T you? pay attention J., that doesn't cost much.

Well, duh (1)

heli_flyer (614850) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133930)

We've had clones for millions of years. They're called...identical twins. Identical twins don't have the same personality. Clones don't have the same personality either. Surprise!

More cats? (5, Funny)

hoop33 (585222) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133932)

From the article:
"There are millions of cats in shelters and with rescue groups that need homes, and the last thing we need is a new production strategy for cats."

Classic. Did this quote really come from Bob Barker?

Errors in DNA interpretation (1)

basic70 (154807) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133933)

So, why is anybody surprised?


Building an organism from genes includes a lot of randomness and interpretation errors. It's biologi after all, not computer science.

so - what's the truth about identical twins (2, Interesting)

gollangana (643396) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133953)

I can understand that the coats would have different patterns. Surely the exact progression of cell division in the womb must be fairly chaotic.
This does however raise the question, do identical twins actually have identical fingerprints? It works wonders in (mostly) crappy literature but is it true?

Re:so - what's the truth about identical twins (1, Informative)

GeHa (144811) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133983)

Surely the exact progression of cell division in the womb must be fairly chaotic.

Embryonic development is not chaotic; it's a cat, not a cancer. In fact, for a small animal such as C. elegans, the history is every single cell in the animal is known. This is not so for larger animals for practical reasons (ie. size, lack of transparancy, growing in womb etc), but that doesn't imply chaos.

Can you imagine... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5133959)

...a Mosix cluster of these?

Cats galore (2, Funny)

alhobbel (619402) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133975)

Didn't Stephen King already make this point in 'Pet Semetary'? Thou shalt not resurrect dead pets (especially cats, because they are in league with the devil) It just can't be done.

All clones turn out to be evil... (2, Funny)

velcrokitty (555902) | more than 11 years ago | (#5133995)

As part of the Bush administration's programme to shut down all cloning research, they will begin to use footage from Pet Cemetary to demonstrate that ressurrected creatures are inherently evil. They're still having problems finding footage of evil sheep (whatever happened to Dolly), but have more than enough examples from science fiction of other creatures, including humans.

It's a shame that the US government is perverting the truth as we all know that clones aren't evil, just soulless empty husks. ;)

Smile, it's Wednesday!

I already knew - I saw Star Trek Nemesis (0)

joeflies (529536) | more than 11 years ago | (#5134002)

spoiler follows

In Star Trek Nemesis, the villian Shinzon is a clone of Picard. Unlike Picard, however, Shinzon was tortured and placed in a slave labor camp. As a result, the two of them look nothing alike, because he says that while the genes are the same, the social environment plays just an important part in the development of a man (sort of like Eddie Murphy's Trading Places)

[sarcasm]And all this time, I thought they looked different because they used different actors. In reality, it's Star Trek pointing out social themes in a sci fi setting again.[/sarcasm]

DNA testing (3, Funny)

kjd (41294) | more than 11 years ago | (#5134013)

Assuming that cloning humans yields similar results, I suppose we can eventually say goodbye to scientifically-accurate DNA matching in the crime lab.

"No! It wasn't me! I've been cloned!"

Needs a new name besides cc. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5134029)

A better name for "cc" or carbon copy is "copy cat".
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...