Re: Artificial nucleotides?
- From: JohnGW <jgissw@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 01:17:26 -0500 (EST)
On Feb 6, 9:04 pm, JohnGW <jgi...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 4, 10:22 am, nos...@xxxxxxxxxx (Paul Ciszek) wrote:
In article <fnt47r$al...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Tim Tyler <seemy...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Of course, the real fun would come from extra aminos. Start
by adding the common non-coded amino acids, with corresponding
mRNAs - that way at least the new organisms will stand a chance
in the wild without being dependent on dietary supplements.
I wouldn't WANT the new organisms to be able to survive in the wild!
What if they are *better* at incorporating biomass and using energy than
conventional life is?
--
Please reply to: | President Bush is promoting Peace and Democracy
pciszek at panix dot com | in the Middle East by selling Weapons to the
Autoreply is disabled | King of Saudi Arabia.
Well, they might survive at the expense of organised life, as a
sort of cancer. In other words, screw\
up all genomes.
I suppose these molecules are based on a ribose and a phosphate
group, with some sort of
base, or do you suppose that's incorrect.
Regards
John GW- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I'll add a little. dSICS and dMMO2 convey nothing to me, unless d
means di, and the letters stand
for elements. I have only the basic knowledge of chemistry that a
mathematics major
might be expected to have. So perhaps someone would enlighten me.
JGW
.
- Prev by Date: Re: The Founder Selection Effect
- Next by Date: Re: Group selection in the breeding of super chickens
- Previous by thread: Re: Artificial nucleotides?
- Next by thread: Nature Genetics: A Genetic View of Jewish History
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
