Originally Posted by GRB

If I could make a point about the genetics involved here; (sorry its a bit long)

Selectrive breeding and modern genetic "splicing" are fairly similar. The same process is going on - usually, the swapping of a trait controlled by a major gene complex.

A major gene is kind of like "one gene = one trait" if you get what I mean - very common in plant breeding, where a gene for succulence of fruit might be controlled for by one dominant gene complex. Its really hard to selectively breed for non dominant alleles because they are usually masked and dont express their effects (eg hair colour).

In the old days, such "selection" by humans was done by reciprocal backcrossing. You take a F1 hybrid and cross it back to the parent species, and continue this process over a period of years. This often expresses dominant genetic traits in a hybrid of the two species. In plants, inter-special and inter-genus crosses were achieved with mutagenesis (radiation, chemicals), protoplast fusion and embryo rescue. In animals, similar techniques were harder (i.e animals dont have protoplasts) but the mechanism is pretty much the same.

The reason you get "bad" traits is due to linkage drag. This is when you have a major gene controlling a "good" trait linked to other genes for "bad" traits like disease etc. Its very hard to see if good genes drag bad genes until they are expressed - perhaps in later life. You can imaging how this lag could be seen in pedigree dogs - it wasnt intentional, but just appeared over time as recessives and "bad" genes accumulated.

Modern genetic traits like those involved in this mantid glowing malarky use a similar theory, but because the new technology is more specific, gene regions can be mapped better - reducing the drag (or eliminating it) of bad genes into hybrids and making it easier to cross unrelated species. Hell, its now possible to splice bacterial genes into animals etc. Its not always a bad thing; many plant crops are enhanced in such a manner, and its essentially the same process as "selective breeding" - but instead of 12 years of backcrossing to produce a new wheat variety, it takes a matter of months because its more accurate. Its not all bad - look up "golden rice" on wiki for example.

Anyway, I thought I would say this just to clarify that the genetics involved in this experiment are not really any different from "natural" hybridization or selective breeding that has occurred throughout our entire history.

On the topic at hand however; I feel this is corporate. Glow in the dark fungi were the first, and that was a large jump for science. This is old technology - hence why its frittered its way into the hobby. Not for me those things! I like the "natural" variety!

Originally Posted by C_Strike

Lol, think im too wasted for this now cant really take it in, let alone come back with a comprehendable reply:P will have a proper read 2morrow, games tonight!
Looks very interesting though, from browsing theres good points and aguments

Originally Posted by GRB

hahaha! I am sure you will probably notice numerous mistakes, I thought you were quite clued up on your genetics!

Originally Posted by enlightenment

Scientfically, if we can create a glow fish and mantis, what would it take to create a mantis that was translucent, and you could see all it's organs, inside, etc..?

In theory, could that be done?

Now, where did I put my skins.....