Cloning

[jason]

What is your take?  Are you opposed to using semen from cloned bull?  Heat Wave 1?  How far it too far and it should it be banned in the show steer arena?

 

[jason]

Here is an interesting article about cloning and texas longhorns.



"Cattle shows and contests are generally considered showcases for breeders and owners, who have worked to produce new genetic combinations of cattle through their breeding programs. There are elements of skill and chance in producing the best show cow or bull, or in producing the longest-horned Texas Longhorn. Breeders study the best genetic lines, and experiment by crossing cows with bulls that they think will produce unique or superior genetic combinations.

Cloned animals, in contrast, produce a known and non-unique genetic combination. Clones are replicates of animals—typically animals that are already known to be among the best in the breed. From a genetic standpoint, allowing entry of clones into a show or contest is exactly like allowing the same animal to be entered twice in the same show (perhaps once by the breeder and once by the owner). Should the same animal be allowed to claim more than one spot in a show? Should the same animal be allowed to compete year after year in the same age class?

Allowing clones to compete in a show or contest removes the elements of breeding skill and genetic chance. From a genetic point of view, it does not seem reasonable to let clones (of known genetic potential) compete against animals of original, new genetic combinations (or unknown genetic potential). However, allowing the non-clonal offspring of clones to compete in shows is reasonable, since these offspring have the same level of genetic variability (and the same chances for quality, both good and bad) as any of the offspring of the original animal.

Likewise, there may be reasons to compete clones against one another. Although the genetic potential of the animal is known, the environmental conditions may differ. So, a person may wish to demonstrate the effects of a superior diet, for instance. For this reason, it would not be unreasonable to have a separate category for clonal animals in competitions."

http://home.austin.rr.com/doublehelix/Cloning.html

 

[caldanmc]

My take on cloning is this;

If you look at the cattle that have been cloned, or at least the ones that most of us have heard of, you will notice that most are geared to the show ring.  It started with te 5 Flush calves, and Heatwave 1 (Wave on Wave) and I am sure that there are many more.  Just this year in denver, they offered the genetic cell line of, I believe it was, Strictly Business.  The semen from these cloned bulls will most likely be used to produce show cattle, as will the offspring.  Do those show calves eventually make it to the food chain?  Yes, they will, but the actual amount of beef put into the market is just a drop in the bucket when campared to the industry as a whole. 
There are certainly exceptions to this.  For example, I believe that Coleman's in Montana cloned their Record yearling weight holder for the limousin breed, COLE First Down.  I could see the clones from him having a greater impact on the beef industry than any of the cloned clubby bulls just simply because he was geared more toward the commercial producer. 
Is cloning scary, to some it is, but it is more unnatural than anything.  Should we as cattle producers be playing God?  Some would say no, but if you think about it, it is just the next step in a progression that started with A.I. and then moved to E.T.  Both of those technologies basically gave us the ability to capitalize on proven, predictable genetics.  Cloning assures that we get those genetics to start with.  You still have to manage the cattle correctly in order to get a good end product. 
I do see it as a negative thing if we as producers or customers begin to rely on it, especially now that the TH and PHA thing is getting to be so big.  Those two things are already shaping how we manage our cowherds.  If we continue to clone that type of bulls, we stand to move backwards in addressing these to problems. 
Coning is a tool that some cattle producers have opted to use.  I don't see it as a huge issue, especially with the cost involved at the present time.  As far as beef is concerned, I am not worried.  Besides, how do we even know if a steer that we buy is a Heatwave or a Heatwave 1?  Genetically, they are the same.

 

[red]

They sold the rights to the cell line to Strictly Business in Denver for $5000.  Here was what was listed in the catalog.

Terms of Sale of Strictly Business Cell Line
1. Purchase Price. Buyer agrees to pay the bid price on the date of the auction in good U.S. funds.
The bid price is the amount of the final auction bid which is accepted by the auctioneer at the conclusion
of the live auction of the EBB STRICTLY BUSINESS CELL LINE.
2. Transfer of Ownership. Complete and total ownership of the cell line shall transfer to Buyer upon
announcement by auctioneer that the cell line is “sold.” Risk of loss transfers to buyer immediately.
Buyer agrees to promptly pay the bid price to the sale clerk and to executive the contract.
Owners will at the earliest possible date authorize and inform Infigen of the transfer of ownership,
and Infigen shall change its records to identify the new owner as the owner of the cell line. Any and
all fees associated with the maintenance or storage of the cell line shall be assumed by Buyer upon
transfer of ownership.
3. Right to Clone. Upon conclusion of the auction, payment of the full purchase price and execution
of the agreement, Buyer will possess all legal right, title and interest in and to the EBB STRICTLY
BUSINESS CELL LINE. Buyer will possess the only legal right to clone EBB Strictly Business and
agrees to attempt to do so within twelve months of the date of the auction. Buyer may produce as
many clones as the buyer desires. The cost of producing the clones shall be borne by the Buyer.
4. Warranty of Owners. Owners hereby make the following express, written warranties:
a. Owners warrant and guarantee following the auction, payment of the bid price and execution of
the contract by Buyer that the Buyer will possess the total genetic component of EBB Strictly
Business, and no other person, firm or corporation possesses or will possess the same.
b. The only EBB STRICTLY BUSINESS CELL LINE produced is housed at Infigen and owned by the
Owners. No other cell lines exist, and none can be created.
c. At the time when any one clone of EBB Strictly Business reaches semen-producing age and
actually freezes semen, the Owners will withdraw all existing semen from the market and will
sell no more semen from EBB Strictly Business. The withdrawal of semen from the market will
be accomplished by contacting all known semen distributors with the semen in inventory and
directing those distributors to return said semen to Owners. Owners shall retain the right to use
the existing semen in their own herds.
d. In the event that no clones are able to be produced by Buyer within twenty-four months of the
date of the contract, Owners will refund the sale price to Buyer in full. This refund provision shall
only apply if Buyer establishes to Owners that he, or she, has made a good faith effort to produce
one or more clones and that due to circumstances beyond the control of the Buyer was
unable to produce a clone. A clone is produced for purposes of the contract when that clone is
born alive.
e. Owners make no warranty of any kind other than the warranty expressed in the contract. All warranties
of fitness for purpose and merchantability are disclaimed.
f. Owners warrant they have good, complete and merchantable title to the EBB STRICTLY BUSINESS
CELL LINE.
5. Assignment. The substance and nature of the contract are personal to the parties. Neither party
may assign or delegate their rights, duties or obligations under this contract.
6. Entire Agreement. The written document will contain the entire agreement of the parties. This
agreement may only be modified by a subsequent writing of the parties.
7. Choice of Law. The law of the State of Iowa shall apply to the interpretation and enforcement of

 

[heatwave]

i know someone who bought rights, but you have to pay I think around 18k for a clone.  From what I read there is a better chance that it could have medical problems or a shorter life. 

But, in reality it comes down to what you breed it with.  I guess you could start cloning the perfect heifer, or clone the perfect show calf. 

What would be interesting is if they could go into the DNA and change and isolated chromosomes to change the appearance of the bull and make it a super freak.  However, I think it takes a long time to map the entire structure, but I am sure it is has some similarity to humans. 

 

[angus2rite]

My take on cloning is this;

If you look at the cattle that have been cloned, or at least the ones that most of us have heard of, you will notice that most are geared to the show ring.  It started with te 5 Flush calves, and Heatwave 1 (Wave on Wave) and I am sure that there are many more.  Just this year in denver, they offered the genetic cell line of, I believe it was, Strictly Business.  The semen from these cloned bulls will most likely be used to produce show cattle, as will the offspring.  Do those show calves eventually make it to the food chain?  Yes, they will, but the actual amount of beef put into the market is just a drop in the bucket when campared to the industry as a whole. 
There are certainly exceptions to this.  For example, I believe that Coleman's in Montana cloned their Record yearling weight holder for the limousin breed, COLE First Down.  I could see the clones from him having a greater impact on the beef industry than any of the cloned clubby bulls just simply because he was geared more toward the commercial producer. 
Is cloning scary, to some it is, but it is more unnatural than anything.  Should we as cattle producers be playing God?  Some would say no, but if you think about it, it is just the next step in a progression that started with A.I. and then moved to E.T.  Both of those technologies basically gave us the ability to capitalize on proven, predictable genetics.  Cloning assures that we get those genetics to start with.  You still have to manage the cattle correctly in order to get a good end product. 
I do see it as a negative thing if we as producers or customers begin to rely on it, especially now that the TH and PHA thing is getting to be so big.  Those two things are already shaping how we manage our cowherds.  If we continue to clone that type of bulls, we stand to move backwards in addressing these to problems. 
Coning is a tool that some cattle producers have opted to use.  I don't see it as a huge issue, especially with the cost involved at the present time.  As far as beef is concerned, I am not worried.  Besides, how do we even know if a steer that we buy is a Heatwave or a Heatwave 1?  Genetically, they are the same.

You....are right! I agree with everything. Nice take. 

 

[genes]

My "problem" with cloning is that it doesn't make sense to me from a genetic improvement standpoint.  Because the whole point of breeding is to get something better.  I mean, oh sure, it doesn't always work that way.  But it should be the goal.  Cloning means staying the same, sticking with the status quo.  I think that if these bulls are good enough to be cloned, then they should have sons out there that are good enough to use instead.  If they don't, then are they really that good of a bull?

 

[jason]

My "problem" with cloning is that it doesn't make sense to me from a genetic improvement standpoint.  Because the whole point of breeding is to get something better.  I mean, oh sure, it doesn't always work that way.  But it should be the goal.  Cloning means staying the same, sticking with the status quo.  I think that if these bulls are good enough to be cloned, then they should have sons out there that are good enough to use instead.  If they don't, then are they really that good of a bull?

Your right it still comes down to breeding; until they are actually able to manipulate the genes to produce favorable traits. 

The major advantage I see is more semen to sell of a name brand bull and a never ending supply in the future. 

 

[genes]

Yeah....if we want the neverending supply.  I mean think about it this way.  What if they'd managed to introduce cloning and make it widespread in the 50's, with the belt buckle cattle, or in the 80's with the skyscrapers?  You migh say, oh we have much better cattle now though....but "better" isn't static.  I mean with the amount they do now, it isn't likely to have much of an impact on the whole of the cattle industry.  But why bother, I think, just for simple production purposes (I do think cloning for research is ok).

 

[DL]

Heatwave (the person) you are right - it is currently about 20K to clone a bovine and the cloned animal has a much greater chance of both in utero and post natal complications - to the point where they (whoever they is) say that these calves should be born at  a facility with basically an intensive care unit.  There was a whole "Food Animal Clinics of North America" on the veterinary aspects of cloning - I can dig up specifics if anybody is interested.

The Longhorn article was thought provoking - I'm gonna have to cogitate

There is a clone of Scamper Charmain James barrel racing horse (gelding) - this sort of makes sense to me - the clone will be used as a stud to pertptuate those athletic traits of the gelded athlete --- I am not sure where I stand on cloning for show ring success..........another sticky wicket to work our way thru! DL[flash=200,200][/flash]

ps I inserted this flash but I have no idea what it is! Ain't life grand!

 

[knabe]

clones, in spite of the seeming endless claims of identity, actually can be not 100% identical.  Unless both the ribosomes and the genetic dna are sequenced fully, one can never know if they are truly idendical.  the horse smart little lena was cloned, had 5 surviving babies, and two have parrot mouth.  if this gene/s were cloned, one could sequence just this gene or it's regulatory elements and look for differences.  the differences could be attributable to a few things during replication and repair at the early cell division stage.  one other thing about cloned animals is that they tend to retain the telomer length (ends of chromosomes) that the orignal animal had.  people theorize that this causes premature aging in the cloned animal.  this leads me to believe that the offsrpring from cloned animals would be interesting to look at in terms of their telomere length.  all kinds of telomere studies from all angles including aging etc.  in humans, the hunnington disease gene/s were not found until the assembly on its chromosome was finished and it was found that there was a segmental repeat of the gene.  the more copies one has, the greater the severity.  the reason it was hard to find was that assembling the gene was difficult as all the sequence piled on top of each other as it was so identical.  this probably will happen for a lot of genes.  mammals seem to have this segmental duplication thing going on, while plants have their entire genome duplicated once or even twice.  if this happens, their reproductive organs tend to be enlarged, seeds, bigger and more, at least when selected for.

Isn't it true knabe that it is the chromosomal DNA that in theory is identical (but not 100% as you say) but the mitochondrial DNA is not identical? DL (cow)

 

[DL]

ps - I am not exactly sure how I did that! look up!

 

[knabe]

correct on the chromsomal dna depending on how you look at it.  since you are injecting the dna from the animal to be cloned into essentially a cell from a recipient cell giver and put in a recipient cow, then yes, the mitochondrial dna is differerent as well, as well as whatever the environment of the recip cow gives.  i forgot to elaborate on that as i was thinking of a fertilized egg that when divided, and taking a cell at that point, that the mitochondrial dna could be different as well.  but as you correctly pointed out, the artificial process could progress a couple of ways, one, keep grabbing a few cells as mass divides, or do separate injections of dna for every clone.  even then the mitochondrial dna could have different differences.  don't know if this would simply be interesting to note the differences, or that something else could be elucidated, such as that parrot mouth in horses.  there are people working on tracking how these "SNPS" are generated and why they happen where.  putting selective pressure on them versus "natural" selection is interesting too and if the SNP's keep showing up in the areas where some pressure to get rid of them exists.

 

[DL]

(cow) OK - I think I have a sort of cloning philosophy

Cloning just because we can do it - just doesn't flip my minnow.

Cloning sires of winning show cattle is like cloning pretty people - OK - eye candy - nice to look at - but...have they improved any aspect of the world other than the owner of the clones pocket book? I mean why clone a pretty person just because he/she is a pretty person - look at the original.

Cloning a horse like Scamper who is incapable of reproducing but has incredible athletic talent makes some sense to me - we are looking to maintain enhance improve a function. To that end we could clone the cow that jumped over the moon and hope that the clone could jump over Jupiter.

Cloning for genetic improvement - interesting question - by the time the original (bovine here) has proven his worth, been cloned and the clone has semen available aren't we already behind in genetic improvement?

Well it isn't totally worked out but it is a rough draft!  (cow) (cow)  (dog) (cow) (one of these cows is a clone - can you tell which one?)

DL

 

[genes]

Dl I'm basically of the exact same mind of everything you said up there.  Add in that I don't mind cloning done in research, not ony to improve the process, but also because it is a step in some other work like transgeneics.