Comments on: Cock-a-doodle-doo. What, what?

Cock-a-doodle-doo. What, what?

naomi — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:38:21 -0800

20,000 genes and splices: the Colonel's Secret Recipe revealed! Even the fanciest chickens won't be able to ignore their genetic cousins now.

By: Captaintripps

Captaintripps — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:50:09 -0800

Is this the whole Animal 54 conspiracy theory?

By: ladd

ladd — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 17:57:58 -0800

There is no conspiracy. (cluck)

By: painquale

painquale — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:01:28 -0800

Thanks for that hatchery link. Excellent prices! Now I know where to do my Christmas shopping.

By: Captaintripps

Captaintripps — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:22:09 -0800

To explain my first comment, if you're not aware. I went to a rather...earthish collegiate institution. I often heard the trope that Kentucky Fried Chicken changed its name to KFC because they no longer used chicken, they used a genetically engineered animal. I believe it was called animal 54. I've not set foot in a KFC in years, but let me lay this out for you. These people said that Animal 54 was a chicken-derived creature with four breasts, four wings and essentially no head. It was fed intravenously. Now, if they didn't see the economic issues involved with that...

By: srboisvert

srboisvert — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:31:55 -0800

KFC is simultaneously disgusting and delicious and much like KFC herbs and spices making fat soaked chicken taste good nothing that makes a science article more palatable than puns. As for animal 54: This is all I could find But there is lots of information debunking KFC hoaxes.

By: kenko

kenko — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:51:55 -0800

Animal 57 is also known as Animal 57.

By: kenko

kenko — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:52:03 -0800

Animal 54 is also known as Animal 57.

By: Jimbob

Jimbob — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:05:37 -0800

Matt...hey Matt...can I change my username to Animal 57?

By: blendor

blendor — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:42:49 -0800

Many researchers may be most intrigued by the non-coding parts of the chicken genome. It is not unusual for different species to share regions of DNA that have a fundamental biological function. Scientists call these areas 'conserved' because any mutations within them disrupt that function and are usually selected against. But when the group compared the chicken genome with that of other mammal species, including humans, they found a surprising amount of similarity in regions not thought to be involved in protein production. cool stuff! thanks for the link.

By: lodurr

lodurr — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:54:15 -0800

These people said that Animal 54 was a chicken-derived creature with four breasts, four wings and essentially no head. It was fed intravenously. "You're way off. Think smaller. Think more legs." -- Krusty T. Clown

By: painquale

painquale — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:03:56 -0800

Animal 54 was a chicken-derived creature with four breasts, four wings and essentially no head. It was fed intravenously No brain, no suffering! Bam! Science triumphs again!

By: lodurr

lodurr — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:05:42 -0800

(See, now, this is the kind of stuff you lose if you get too hard-assed about derails....) But Seriously, Folks. I heard about "Red Jungle Fowl 256" (for that is her "name"....) on "Wait Wait Don't Tell Me" this morning. So now, they've sequenced the genome of the fore-runner to modern domestic chickens. Those maniacs. Damn them. Damn them all to hell. [deadpan /]

By: Captaintripps

Captaintripps — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:08:50 -0800

54, 57; it's all bogus.

By: Fuzzy Monster

Fuzzy Monster — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 20:21:22 -0800

Ah, TheInternational Chicken Genome Sequencing Consortium-- they do good work. How great would that look on a business card? FADE IN on a swanky cocktail party in a Manhattan penthouse. Two men in tuxedos stand chatting by the canapes. Man #1: So, what do you do? Man #2: I'm a member of The International Chicken Genome Sequencing Consortium. We travel the world solving mysteries by sequencing chicken genes. And yourself? Man #1: I, uh... I sell insurance. FADE OUT.

By: MikeKD

MikeKD — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:43:44 -0800

Those similar regions sound like 'junk' DNA. I remember reading an article in Scientific American (now archived, it was the Oct '04 edition -- here's a blurb) about 'junk' DNA. Although it's function is still unknown, the author (John S. Mattick) wrote about how the stability of this excess DNA could point to it being involved in basic regulatory functions (I think some of the functions involved RNA and the control of DNA). IIRC, one of the ideas was that instead of proteins, the jDNA described other molecules that managed the proteins generated by the protein-producing segments of DNA. This looks like a much denser version of the SciAm article, by the same guy. After quickly looking at this, I want to say that one of things from the SciAm article he mentioned was that if similar sequences of jDNA are found across diverse species, it could point to the jDNA--in the article "non-protein-coding RNA"--actually being necessary for higher life-forms.

By: Specklet

Specklet — Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:14:32 -0800

Whatever. As long as it tastes like chicken...

By: Deepspace

Deepspace — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 01:12:21 -0800

Whatever. As long as it tastes like chicken

By: grouse

grouse — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 05:04:59 -0800

I actually am a member of the International Chicken Genome Sequencing Consortium. I really should get business cards printed up. Some of my responsibilities involved comparing noncoding regions of the genome with mammals. Almost everyone in the field now accepts that "junk" DNA is a misnomer and the term is not usually. We usually call the bit between genes intergenic sequence. And it is almost certainly has many more subtle aspects than the one that John Mattick wrote about.

By: naomi

naomi — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:16:59 -0800

I totally love the way science and comedy are merging in this thread. Please, grouse... um, before I get too distracted by your nickname... do you have any insider stories from the International Chicken Genome Sequencing Consortium? For example, is it true that chickens really do have a sense of smell, after all? And that domestic chickens have more diverse genes than the red jungle fowl?

By: grouse

grouse — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 06:55:33 -0800

For example, is it true that chickens really do have a sense of smell, after all? Yes, chickens do have a sense of smell. According to the current best data, they have 283 olfactory receptor genes, a similar number to that of humans. And that domestic chickens have more diverse genes than the red jungle fowl? This question actually relates to work done by the International Chicken Polymorphism Map Consortium, not the Sequencing Consortium. And I think you mean to ask if the nucleotide diversities of the domestic breeds are higher than that of the red jungle fowl. No, they are approximately equal, but people expected the domestic breeds to be far less diverse.

I know you're making fun of us, but the chicken genome is actually very useful scientifically. Even if you don't care about the agricultural uses of the information. The reason is these regions of non-gene DNA discussed earlier. If these regions were truly junk, you would expect them to have completely changed over the last 310 million years. But there are regions that are almost completely conserved against human sequence. There must be some biological reason for this, and knowing where these conserved regions are help us understand how the products of the human genome are controlled, among other things.

By: naomi

naomi — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:05:28 -0800

No, no, I am truly fascinated by all the genome mapping projects! It's just that chickens are inherently comical. I wonder what our common ancestor looked like?

By: Goedel

Goedel — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 07:20:33 -0800

I wonder what our common ancestor looked like? Like your garden variety, floor-crawling, slithery lizard.

By: Fuzzy Monster

Fuzzy Monster — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:22:05 -0800

I actually am a member of the International Chicken Genome Sequencing Consortium. That's Awesome. I Love Metafilter! And I, too, am truly fascinated by all the genome mapping projects. The Future Is Now! grouse, what's your take on Animal 54/57? An urban myth, no doubt, but could one of these creatures actually be 'built?'

By: grouse

grouse — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 08:59:59 -0800

naomi: Birds share a common ancestor with reptiles. The group of reptiles and birds, the sauropsids, share a common ancestor with mammals. Animals in the sauropsid+mammal taxon are referred to as amniotes. I'm not an expert on paleontology so I'll defer to Goedel's source here as to what it looked like. Fuzzy Monster: A big growing slab of meat? I think we're a little ways off from that. Chickens without beaks or feathers? Yeah, it could happen in a few years. The research cost would be incredible though, and I doubt it would be worth it for KFC.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:29:28 -0800

I actually am a member of the International Chicken Genome Sequencing Consortium. I actually am wondering if I've been successfully trolled. ICGSC? It's so wonderfully strange!

By: grouse

grouse — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 10:50:59 -0800

fff: Check my MeFi profile against the membership list at the end of the paper.

By: five fresh fish

five fresh fish — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 11:47:59 -0800

Truth is always stranger than fiction!

By: b1tr0t

b1tr0t — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:10:26 -0800

The featherless chicken was done a few years ago. Next step: get rid of everything but the breasts and drumsticks.

By: amberglow

amberglow — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:28:04 -0800

You guys should read Oryx & Crake by Atwood. (There's a product that's just living chicken breast--it's all about what happens when genetic modification goes too far)

By: b1tr0t

b1tr0t — Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:53:33 -0800

Too far is when a living, disembodied, human breast can be found at ThinkGeek.

By: catachresoid

catachresoid — Tue, 14 Dec 2004 04:34:34 -0800

Don't be silly. They won't be disembodied, they'll be attached to mouse pads.

By: theora55

theora55 — Tue, 14 Dec 2004 07:29:10 -0800

IANAICGSCM (I Am Not An International Chicken Genome Sequencing Consortium Member) and IANAICPMCM (I Am Not An International Chicken Polymorphism Map Consortium Member). Grouse, this is good.