Genetically Engineer Tangs to be small?

[BeanAnimal]

That's not a tang, or even a fish.

No, but it was a test and you failed, so no bacon for you.

 

[RSNJReef]

I don’t know if anyone remembers this, but 7-9 years ago a company had come out with a food pellet that was supposed to stunt the growth of fish to keep them small.

If I remember correctly it caused a lot of turmoil with reefers because they said it wasn’t natural and inhumane, then months later the food was never heard of again.

I forget which company it was though.

 

[KrisReef]

My scientific background is primarily in human population genetics (or at least what I focused on during grad school). The reality is that while we have a lot of genetic information on most hominids resurrecting them is a giant ethical dilemma considering that they became extinct since they were not able to compete resources with us not to mention that an intelligent being brought back for academic purposes is just terrifying on so many levels… just too many variables and too much that can go wrong. I have so much respect for life in general that perhaps I’m over cautious with how we use genetic engineering. Genetic engineering to better the current species on the planet from a health perspective and not enhancement? Yes, I’m all for it. The rest starts to become very gray. But again, a limited personal perspective like anyone else’s. I can only see what’s in front of me and what I might imagine. Reality is a whole other ball game.

Don't you think we could resurrect the Neanderthals ethically since we descended from them and have figured out away for them to survive again now?

We could farm them and eat them, harvesting Neanderthal's has to be more ethical than eating fishes. It's a species right to choose.

 

[PharmrJohn]

I don’t know if anyone remembers this, but 7-9 years ago a company had come out with a food pellet that was supposed to stunt the growth of fish to keep them small.

If I remember correctly it caused a lot of turmoil with reefers because they said it wasn’t natural and inhumane, then months later the food was never heard of again.

I forget which company it was though.

That does not sound good. What was the mechanism? Vitamin deficiency?

 

[BeanAnimal]

No, but it was a test and you failed, so no bacon for you.

@KrisReef - Correct responses were things like this

"Ohh.. wow, yes"
"bacon!"
"mmm bacon!"
"a good start, but not big enough"
"I need a bigger smoker"
"Does it come with super size hens too?"

acceptable responses using your chosen terminology would have been

"Does it come with a lifetime supply of Tang?"
"Wang Tang look that that pork thang"

Or even...
"Sure beats the snot out of eating fish"
"Holy Mackerel, look at that divine swine"

There were not many failing grades....but "That's not a tang or even a fish" confused our judges (me).
Sorry, but you have not earned (are not bringing home) the bacon this time.

 

[crazyfishmom]

Don't you think we could resurrect the Neanderthals ethically since we descended from them and have figured out away for them to survive again now?

We could farm them and eat them, harvesting Neanderthal's has to be more ethical than eating fishes. It's a species right to choose.

That got dark really fast.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Though that is probably way easier than trying to make a fish smaller. But let’s see what you guys think.

Just commenting on the fluorescent fish, that's about the easiest possible genetic engineering: insert one known and available gene that makes one protein and let it glow in a new organism.

Size of an organism is controlled by many genes, and likely is a very, very complicated project that will not be carried out for a hobby.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Yeah that’s true but we did it with dogs lol. Just compare a chicuaha to there ancestors or modern day wolves. But yeah, that did take thousands of years.

Tiny wolves in a fish bowl. No aggression expected there. lol

 

[JoJosReef]

Just commenting on the fluorescent fish, that's about the easiest possible genetic engineering: insert one known and available gene that makes one protein and let it glow in a new organism.

Size of an organism is controlled by many genes, and likely is a very, very complicated project that will not be carried out for a hobby.

 

[Jesse213]

We’ll have to wait for some billionaire to do it then lol

Polo reef

 

[Cthulukelele]

Just commenting on the fluorescent fish, that's about the easiest possible genetic engineering: insert one known and available gene that makes one protein and let it glow in a new organism.

Size of an organism is controlled by many genes, and likely is a very, very complicated project that will not be carried out for a hobby.

Having done some genetic engineering in lab, the amount of off-target effects I've seen just tinkering with things that you would assume were genes controlling a singular process for a cell are immense.

Seconding that this sort of work would be incredibly challenging, require iterative ethically dubious scientific replicates, and likely still have massive negative repercussions for the fish.

 

[KrisReef]

That got dark really fast.

Sorry, I haven't had lunch yet and all this talk about bacon made me hungry.

 

[Formulator]

Well after just witnessing a very tense thread about how many tangs can you keep in a reef tank or how big the tank has to be for tangs.

Let’s focus on the a hypothetical future sprinkled with some science fiction?

Perhaps maybe one day science be will able to genetically engineer tangs to be smaller and maybe more docile like a gobby. Maybe they can make a new dwarf blue tang or a yellow tang that only grows to a max size of 2-3 inches. Allowing people to keep them in smaller tanks like 30-50 gallons.

After all we managed to do it with “glofish” by splicing genes from a jellyfish and inserting them into a non fluorescent fish. Or making farmed salmon to grow faster.

Though that is probably way easier than trying to make a fish smaller. But let’s see what you guys think.

The question is not whether we can do this, but rather whether we should.

As someone who has a career in the biotech industry, I can tell you the science is already there. We can make you a small tang right now, and it wouldn’t be groundbreaking science. Whether we should do this is an overwhelming NO. It is completely unethical to tamper with the genetics of a wild animal for the pleasure of hobbyists. What if one got loose in the ocean? Would they be sterile? If we can make designer fishes in the lab, why not humans? Dogs? Cats? Lions designed to be trainable for use in combat? Where do you draw the line? This is non-starter in my opinion and I believe it should be.

That said, selective breeding is possible and we can see the drastic results of such breeding practices in clown fish. Some would even question the ethics of that practice though.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Just commenting on the fluorescent fish, that's about the easiest possible genetic engineering: insert one known and available gene that makes one protein and let it glow in a new organism.

Size of an organism is controlled by many genes, and likely is a very, very complicated project that will not be carried out for a hobby.

i think I recently saw exactly this - patented glow tetras or something.

 

[KrisReef]

Having done some genetic engineering in lab, the amount of off-target effects I've seen just tinkering with things that you would assume were genes controlling a singular process for a cell are immense.

Seconding that this sort of work would be incredibly challenging, require iterative ethically dubious scientific replicates, and likely still have massive negative repercussions for the fish.

Federal judge to hear challenges on Florida’s ban on the sale of lab-grown meat

A federal judge will hear arguments next month on whether to block a new Florida law banning the production and sale of lab-grown meat, following a challenge from California-based UPSIDE Foods, Inc.

www.wokv.com

They already grew a hamburger in the lab, a fish can't be that more complicated?

 

[BeanAnimal]

Ahhh - I was not dreaming.

Buy GloFish® online, overnight shipping!

Liven up your aquarium with GloFish® - order online and get $9.50 flat rate overnight shipping on orders over $54.

shop.glofish.com

 

[Tamberav]

Glo Tangs... then we can get complaints how they don't look like the photos from the vender and they must have them under heavy blues and photoshopped...

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

They already grew a hamburger in the lab, a fish can't be that more complicated?

Living hamburgers are hard. Dead hamburgers are easy.

 

[KrisReef]

The question is not whether we can do this, but rather whether we should.

As someone who has a career in the biotech industry, I can tell you the science is already there. We can make you a small tang right now, and it wouldn’t be groundbreaking science. Whether we should do this is an overwhelming NO. It is completely unethical to tamper with the genetics of a wild animal for the pleasure of hobbyists. What if one got loose in the ocean? Would they be sterile? If we can make designer fishes in the lab, why not humans? Dogs? Cats? Lions designed to be trainable for use in combat? Where do you draw the line? This is non-starter in my opinion and I believe it should be.

That said, selective breeding is possible and we can see the drastic results of such breeding practices in clown fish. Some would even question the ethics of that practice though.

Too late!
UC Davis has modified the genetic codes of stawberries to make them survive long distance shipping. They claim they improved the taste but making an berry into an apple did not improve the taste.

Corn, and who know how many other crops, not to mention how many people they have brainwashed in the Universities.

Don't you think that we need the yellow tang now to improve diversity in the field and increase their likelihood of survival from Climate Change?

We could mix in genes from cold water fishes and harvest them out of Portland.

 

[KrisReef]

Living hamburgers are hard. Dead hamburgers are easy.

Reminds me a Phil Hendrie line; ~"We sacrificed a Chicken, well it were already cooked."