Scientists reproduce evolutionary changes by manipulating embryonic development of mice

Scientists reproduce evolutionary changes by manipulating embryonic development of mice

A group of researchers from the University of Helsinki and the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona have been able to experimentally reproduce morphological changes in mice which took millions of years to occur. in nature Through small and gradual modifications in the embryonic development of mice teeth, induced in the laboratory, scientists have obtained teeth which morphologically are very similar to those observed in the fossil registry of rodent species which separated from mice millions of years ago.

To modify the development of their teeth, the team from the Institute of Biotechnology of the University of Helsinki worked with embryonic teeth cultures from mice not coded by the ectodysplasin A (EDA) protein, which regulates the formation of structures and differentiation of organs in the embryo throughout its development. The teeth obtained with these cultures which present this mutation develop into very basic forms, with very uniform crowns. Scientists gradually added different amounts of the EDA protein to the embryonic cells and let them develop.

The researchers observed that the teeth formed with different degrees of complexity in their crown. The more primitive changes observed coincide with those which took place in animals of the Triassic period, some two hundred million years ago. The development of more posterior patterns coincides with the different stages of evolution found in rodents which became extinct already in the Palaeocene Epoch, some 60 million years ago. Researchers have thus achieved experimentally to reproduce the transitions observed in the fossil registry of mammal teeth.

The team of scientists were able to contrast the shape of these teeth with a computer-generated prediction model created by Isaac Salazar-Ciudad, researcher at the UAB and at the University of Helsinki, which reproduces how the tooth changes from a group of equal cells to a complex three-dimensional structure, with the full shape of a molar tooth, calculating the position of space of each cell. The model is capable of predicting the changes in the morphology of the tooth when a gene is modified, and therefore offers an explanation of the mechanisms that cause these specific changes to occur in the shape of teeth throughout evolution.

Evolution happens when one needs to adapt in order to survive. You can see these changes in the animal kingdom, there will be differences in a species based on location & the ability to have adapted to it's environment. Look at the animals that have evolved to not have eyes because they live in dark caves.

This study is interesting because it is on the same level, if not higher, than the study where they took chicken embryos & changed some DNA to make scales grow instead of feathers. These studies show that those genes are still there even though the species has undergone evolutionary changes.

I find this really interesting..

By any chance do they have pictures of the genetically altered teeth or a scaled chicken? That would be sweet to see a chicken with scales, since they already emulated a dinosaur walk by sticking a plunger on a chook's back end.

I feel we're getting closer to reverse breeding dinosaurs

Evolution needs a driving force behind it to become beneficial to the species, sure you can engineer the teeth, but would those teeth be passed on?

This is just engineering what you want to see come out.

Clever....
nice find, thanks for the post

I think it is an ironic title the folks gave it; it might as well be:

"Scientists violate evolutionary changes by manipulating embryonic development of mice"

I suppose this is a fairly important feat of biotechnology..., although I would prefer if they were going to make an effort to manipulate genes, they would stick to eliminating some of the more important afflictions that occur both in mice, and humans... I don't think sporting the teeth of something that is already extinct makes for a useful prospect for the future.

originally posted by: TheToastmanCometh
I find this really interesting..

By any chance do they have pictures of the genetically altered teeth or a scaled chicken? That would be sweet to see a chicken with scales, since they already emulated a dinosaur walk by sticking a plunger on a chook's back end.

I feel we're getting closer to reverse breeding dinosaurs

The chicken one I watched on a show, I don't recall what it was called, this was a couple years ago.

As for the mice one, science daily didn't have a picture but there might be one if you can find the article in the scientific journal it was released in.

originally posted by: strongfp
Evolution needs a driving force behind it to become beneficial to the species, sure you can engineer the teeth, but would those teeth be passed on?

This is just engineering what you want to see come out.

Those teeth existed before in the history for the species. It isn't manipulating something that wasn't there, it was bringing back something that once existed.

Read the article

originally posted by: Maxmars
I think it is an ironic title the folks gave it; it might as well be:

"Scientists violate evolutionary changes by manipulating embryonic development of mice"

I suppose this is a fairly important feat of biotechnology..., although I would prefer if they were going to make an effort to manipulate genes, they would stick to eliminating some of the more important afflictions that occur both in mice, and humans... I don't think sporting the teeth of something that is already extinct makes for a useful prospect for the future.

It is useful because it:
A) Helps with the theory of evolution
B) The research helps to understand evolution, in each generation, as a game between the possible variations in form and natural selection.

What the end result will be, could be a number of different things.

a reply to: strongfp


No it shows that even though the specific genes are still there, evolution has made them dorment.

I wonder if this process can be reversed to instead accelerate evolution. Although I suppose that mutations would rather be dependent on environmental factors introduced over time. Only one way to know...

hang on a second stop think,,scientists recreate what evolution did ha ha ,,
should read scientists recreate lab experiment the ancient aliens did

nah evolution occures when a pathogen enters the genome.

Viruses hold the RNA, which is transfered into proteins and mutate them. DNA is made up of recorded RNA.

Niches are rare stable mutations. When the hosts DNA Matches the RNA and the code is applied to the DNA as an upgrade. You sow 1000 seeds and infect each one till you find a plant that is immune. You then propigate its seeds and repeat the process until you have plant carrying dominent resistant traits.
This occures in nature and has nothing to do with one species dominating another.
So survival of the fittest is not a true concept, as some of the 1000 plants may be particular immune to another pathogen.
The only thing that matters is the symbiotic relationship.
It is possible to alter the RNA in DNA to reverse the effects that these pathogens have on the genome.

Nothing can add or remove these codes besides pathogens which cause them.


Therefore the Atmospheric change likely changed the pathogens causing a plague, Or pathogens were developed in previous civilizations that permenantly altered current species by hopping from one host species to another.

Such as the Flu virus, Which occures rather commonly.
It is likely similar pathogens made these changes, and given the stories of atlantis its likely evo-disease was created.
The adaption comes from a symbiotic relationship from cells, Phages, and bacteria.

What happens on the greater scheme such as the whole body as an animal dosn't mean much unless those animals come in contact with a species that is susseptible to pathogens it is carrying.

Viruses cause the fastest *mutation* (Evolution) Where positive niches are referred to as evolutionary mutations. And negative ones reffered to as *Cancer*

originally posted by: knoledgeispower

originally posted by: strongfp
Evolution needs a driving force behind it to become beneficial to the species, sure you can engineer the teeth, but would those teeth be passed on?

This is just engineering what you want to see come out.

Those teeth existed before in the history for the species. It isn't manipulating something that wasn't there, it was bringing back something that once existed.

Read the article

I did... but evolution doesn't go 'backwards', if it's not beneficial in today's world then there was a reason why it's not passed on anymore. What I was trying to ask was, will these genes and such be passed on? Sure you can go into every single unborn mouse and change them to have teeth like one of their ancestors did, but would it stick in sexual selection?

originally posted by: strongfp

originally posted by: knoledgeispower

originally posted by: strongfp
Evolution needs a driving force behind it to become beneficial to the species, sure you can engineer the teeth, but would those teeth be passed on?

This is just engineering what you want to see come out.

Those teeth existed before in the history for the species. It isn't manipulating something that wasn't there, it was bringing back something that once existed.

Read the article

I did... but evolution doesn't go 'backwards', if it's not beneficial in today's world then there was a reason why it's not passed on anymore. What I was trying to ask was, will these genes and such be passed on? Sure you can go into every single unborn mouse and change them to have teeth like one of their ancestors did, but would it stick in sexual selection?

I'm not sure if they will be continuing the test to see if it such a gene will be passed on or if it will go back to being dormant. I also don't know if it would stick in sexual selection, it depends on if the female mouse finds it a strong useful trait or not.

originally posted by: Planet teleX
I wonder if this process can be reversed to instead accelerate evolution. Although I suppose that mutations would rather be dependent on environmental factors introduced over time. Only one way to know...

Of course. It's called selective breeding. We do it to dogs and cats all the time.

a reply to: knoledgeispower

Really interesting article. It really is amazing how far our understanding of genetics and evolution has developed.

Thanks for posting this.