Glow in the dark fish in the U.S.A. yay!

[Cian McLiam]

Just because they are transgenic doesent mean they are cloned, Infact they arenot cloned. And the glofish websight says outrightthat they are bred.

They manged to breed a danio and a jellyfish? How interesting.
This has no benifit to the species whatsoever.
Its really amazing what you can persuade people to believe these days.
If this has gotten a little to cutting, please remove the post.

thanks,

Ken

 

[Opcn]

They took one gene from the coral (the greene one is the jelly) and injected it into the blastula (like an embriyo) of the immature fish. as apose to cloneing where they take the entire genome of a mature animal and inject it into an empty egg. The reson that cloning does not work well is because everytime our cells replicate the enzyme that replicates our dna (DNA polyimerase) can only run in one direction and need a few bits of RNA to get started (Can you tell I loved biology) so those few bits of RNA on the end never get replaced with DNA and the chromosome shrinks. when we make gametes (sex cells) there is a special enzyme that puts a whole bunch of telomeres (each telomere is equal to one RNBA primer and one DNA replication) on the end of each chromosome If for some reason and adults cells manage to get a bunch of telomeres they are capable of replicating enmass (cancer). But these fish are created useing young fish and therefore do not have the same health problems. Also to start an egg cell with the DNA from a mature cell in it (clone something) They need to shoot an electric spar into it. These cells go on there own accord.

Now whats that about those who agree being miss enformed

Opcn

 

[FanOFish]

With George W. is opposed by most people, in the UK and in the US, but because he has backing from the people who gain the most money and has actively supported them getting even more money he is still shown to be a popular "good" president.

In the US there hasn't been much of a stir over the whole glofish issue. Mainly because Americans are the most complacent lazy people on the planet.

Ok...my last post because this is getting ridiculous. To think we started talking about fish.

OPCN - good points, and you know what I meant by being at the top.

Ken - very articulate arguments and I certainly respect your viewpoints

Guppy - I took the liberty to add a couple of your quotes.....I don't know what to say to you other than I here it's nice in France this time of year because there are a lot of hard working Americans that might take offense you being called lazy. As far as George W. being opposed by most people in the US....quit listening to the evening news my friend.

Great debate everyone....thanks for the brain exercise and now for me it's back to the fish.

 

[Sinuhe]

The way I understand it is that they first injected the jellyfish gene to a Zebra Danio genome. After those fish grow up, and breed together, they will produce more GloFish. And just keep going from there.

Edit: posted before I saw the more detailed reply by opcn

 

[Cian McLiam]

I am no longer going to participate in this argument, I have seen nothing to detract from the central arguments I made a lot earlier.
To summarise:

These are artificial fish, that can be introduced to the wild, arguments against this are pure suggestion and hope. No-one knows what damage they may do to perfectly healthy wild fish.

If you cannot find a species that fascinates you from the 40,000 known and unknown species, its time to get another hobby.

Nobody has made any suggestions as to what will happen to these fish, if they are not a commercial success. Again, down the toilet.

Where does this 'new technology' take us next? Its not a place I want to go and would be ashamed if fishkeepers are identified as being the first to support a trade in genetically or mechanically created animals.

These fish are a novelty, fish that have evolved over millions of years such beauty and charm all by themselves are worthy of our respect and admiration, these engineered fish and especially the scientists that created them, are not.

You can take my original posts as replies to this post.

Ken

 

[Auratus]

People keep bringing up the fact that these fish were made for science and for the good. What good is selling them to the public? That's not what they are going to be used for anymore. And to have fish that are pratically like lab rats is discusting. The site says that they are used to detect pollutants but forgot to mention that they die finding them. I do not believe that animals should be used for lab testing. Even if it is for the "good", which I don't think any of this is good. Also, rats and rabbits don't need shampoo and lipstick, so why test it on them? Humans want something they should test it on themselves.

And to pay 12.95 for a fish that will probably die because you didn't cycle the tank and believed that you don't have to cycle the tank with these new fish is crap. If they are the exact same as regular danios in every way, then you can't just plop these fish into a brand new tank. And imo zebra danios were pleanty popular before this whole glofish thing. I love them and I know lots of people who own them. They are one of the cheapest fish you can buy besides neon tetras... around here anyway. So why would you want to change a fish that's already imo perfect? If you want bright get a neon or start a marine tank. But noooo that's not good enough. We have to mess with nature.

As for the above post. Good of the species? Save the species? There wasn't a selling or population problem with danios to begin with. What is going to happen to all of the normal zebra danios? No one is going to want the boring silver ones anymore, they will want red! Then what will happen to them?

 

[Opcn]

The glofish genes are good for the glofish they are seporate from zebras now they can still crossbreed but they are not competative (that meanes that in nature the glofish would get eaten more often and produce fewer ofspring so a population in a river somewhere would die out and normal zebras would either be re released or naturaly swim in and colonize) unlike the north american ruddy duck. Also they do not fill a natural niche because the niche is an unatural one just like the unatural niche than every fish that was ever put in a fish tank fills. If they are not a commercial viable or regular zebras are not comercialy viable then people whont buy them and they will stop breading more the breeders whont just buy a giant toilet and flush 1000 down at a time.

Ken stoped talking because he felt that I wasn't addressing his topic directly. The fact of the matter is that he has drawn a line somewhere after hybridization (when you mix two gene pools to accent or mix what one or both populations have) and genetic engineering (when you mix two gene pools with a needle to accent or mix what one or both populations have) for some reason that is very clear to him but not to me. I like to cut down the brush people put up around there arguments just like he did with some of my points with out realising. Most of the side tracks I whent on where ment in direct response to what he had said.

I am against animal testing of cosmedics because its not just putting lipstic on a rat it is puting lipstic in its eye untill it dies of pain. We know animals feel pain but changing a spiecies slightly does not cause them pain because they dont have that specific a sense of identity as a spiecies (even humans dont have that specific a sense of identity THAT IS A LEARNED TRAIT) the fact is they still mate so they must feel like they are the same thing as before.

What good is selling them to the public. well what good is selling cars that polute or toaster ovens that coonsume lots of electricity? or what good comes from selling normal zebras to the public for that matter. the public whould not really be missing out if we did not sell normal zebras at all another fish would fill that niche in the fishtanks of the world.

Opcn

 

[Auratus]

What good is selling them to the public. well what good is selling cars that polute or toaster ovens that coonsume lots of electricity? or what good comes from selling normal zebras to the public for that matter. the public whould not really be missing out if we did not sell normal zebras at all another fish would fill that niche in the fishtanks of the world.

This is not what I meant. These fish had a purpose. To dectect pollutants. Selling them to the public is just for profit. I do not believe that it is right for the company to say this is the purpose for these fish. This is not the purpose anymore. It is for profit. And selling regular danios is fine. I don't agree with mutating them and then selling them. People do a lot of things and sell a lot of things that make no sence. I don't care how much money I could make selling an electric colored fish, I do not believe it is right! I also don't believe in breeding dogs for profit. Millions of animals die in shelters every year. That is why I only rescue animals. I don't go to a petstore and buy them. The only thing I buy are fish and I try to find the ones with the most scuzzy looking fins because someone has to take the unwanted or they will die. If you want to spend 12.95 on a zebra danio just because it's a different color then fine, go ahead. I just don't think it's humane, and we all have our opinions right?

We would not be missing out if we didn't sell normal zebras. Another fish would fill that niche?!?!?! FISH ARE NOT DISPOSABLE!!! They aren't just something you can throw away or let go extinct because you don't like the boring pattern. If everyone had that thinking, all of the wild, natural fish in the world would go extinct and all we would have are mutant hybrid fish that have brain damage. I think that statement is outragous and I can't really say what I want to about that sentence because I would be kicked off of this forum! And I'm sick of this word niche. Fish do not fit into a niche, they are living breathing animals that have feelings whether you can see them or not.

 

[noop]

well here you go :

banned!

(not that it'll make a whole lot of difference...)

 

[Opcn]

Well we are not exposing them to further mutalation by breeding them the mutalation was done in the name of science and there is 6 years worth of dormancy to prove that. and I'm not asking for the mass genicide of zebras! I'm simply suggesting that (while you say we would be no better off with out them) we would be no worse off if no one had ever thought to keep zebras or sell them for others to keep. And who sugested that you don't need to cycle the tank(cause that would have been a real Idiot thing to say).

Opcn

Edited In

Niche of coarse fish fill niche all living creatures do a niche is simply how a living creature gets its food. cow fill a grass eating niche and remoras fill a parasite eating nice and black birds fill a corn eating one.

We bread plants to make them prity or make more food and by changing plants (as seporate spicies) ensure there survival by ensuring that we will keep them around. and fish are no different with the exeption of fish being able to move and do a little bit of thinking.

 

[Auratus]

The company said that there is no need to cycle a tank because these fish can detect if there are any pollutants in your water. So if the fish don't glow, then your tank is fine. Plus they cycle the tank for you. BUT, the zebras will probably die trying to detect the toxins in your aquarium and there goes a fish and 12.95. I would think it would be a lot cheaper to do fishless cycling.

 

[Opcn]

They were bred with the intent to detect polutants but do they realy do that. Are you sure they only glo when ther amonia levles are high, I think you have miss read something. And I'm 100% sure that glofish isn't going to cycle your tank for you because they whont sell you a tank you buy the fish from you LFS not glofish.com . Also they say that they work (live and flourece) in comunity tanks and they whon't tell you to kill your tank to get a few fish to live for a few days. Infact I think it was that they dont glow when the water is poluted (the polutants probably being something other than amonia).

Opcn

 

[bgraber]

Ken misinterpreted something I said. I didn't mean for any fish to "have to be harmed" I'm talking about livestock for consumption. hunting etc. Thousands of years ago that's all we did was hunt. Now we have all of these "morals" surrounding different circumstances. Sure some practice unethical methods, but for some it is necessary for survival. Tell the eskimo that he can't club a seal if he's hungry. Not everyone has a market where they can go and buy whatever they desire. In a "knee-jerk" society, people take their own ideals a little too far. Lets just go by the "what is popular may not be right, and what may be right, is not always popular thing". To each his own. And we must all make our own ways while doing as little harm to everyone else as possible. Regardless of anything else, we have to worry about sustaining our planet for the generations to come. And if this means altering a few fish to help, I am for it. I think we have done tremendous damage to our plnaet and ecosystem already and need to bend over backwards to fix it and prevent as much future damage as we can.. Is there another way other that altering fish to help? I believe so. So I don't know what I'm saying anymore. Welcome to the future. Enjoy your stay

 

[Cian McLiam]

Ken stoped talking because he felt that I wasn't addressing his topic directly. The fact of the matter is that he has drawn a line somewhere after hybridization (when you mix two gene pools to accent or mix what one or both populations have) and genetic engineering (when you mix two gene pools with a needle to accent or mix what one or both populations have) for some reason that is very clear to him but not to me. I like to cut down the brush people put up around there arguments just like he did with some of my points with out realising. Most of the side tracks I whent on where ment in direct response to what he had said

This is not true. I said my angels were bred from the SAME gene pool, here and in and in an email sent direct to you. The gold gene is recessive in ALL angels. You are trying to say I support cross-species hybrids such as flowerhorns. I do not and never will. Thats my line and Im sticking to it, you can dance around the ugly facts if you want.

I am not going to argue the points again, I will however refute misrepresentations and misquotes.

Ken

 

[andyt_uk]

way to go ken

in an almost contradictory fashion, although we have different views on the science behind the glofish i agree with what you're saying