ANIMAL FARM .....did you see?

[silversox]

Did anyone see the last episode of Animal Farm, tonight, Ch 4? I thought it was very fascinating but at the same time rather disturbing.

A girl called Charmain, in the States, had a 10 times champion barrel racing horse called Scamper, who was now retired. Unfortunately he had been gelded, so, in theory, there was no chance of breeding another as good as him. So they took some genes from Scamper, cultivated it, inserted it into a mare's empty egg, then put that into a surrogate mare, and, Bob's your uncle, a duplicate Scamper.

His markings were slightly different, otherwise, they said he was genetically a clone of Scamper. Charmaine was very pleased with the outcome and said the foal's conformation was ideal. Now, I know that quarter horses have huge bums, but this foal's bum was ginormous and his shoulders and forehand were quite small. Is this common in quarter horses, do you think, or is this an experiment that's gone wrong?

Just imagine - if this was a success, we could clone all our favourite horses and never have to worry about finding a suitable replacement when the old fellas pass away!!!

 

[Toby_Zaphod]

I didn't see the programme but when it comes to cloning etc I am of a mind that

"Just because we can do it doesn't mean we should do it"

 

[Bess]

Yes I saw the programme here's a link about the cloned foal.
http://rodeo.about.com/b/a/255911.htm

 

[jesterfaerie]

I did and I agree that it was fascinatiing yet disturbing.
Especially the green pigs and that goats can produce spider silk!
I am unsure how i feel about cloning top horses, just seems they want to do it so they can win that amount of money again.

 

[Fantasy_World]

I watched it as well and found it very interesting.
I am not against cloning but would not want to see any cloning of humans in the future unless it stays in a tube or petri dish and gets no further than the embryonic stage.
As for cloning animals then yes.
I don't know if I would have a beloved pet cloned etc as for me personally I could never love the genetic copy of the original as much as the first and would find it hard on an emotional level as I would feel I was betraying the memory of the genetic donor. But that is just sentimental old me lol.
However cloning animals to benefit a species or for medical advancement - whether for human or animal benefit- I have no qualms about.
I was very happy to see another person thinking along the same lines as me and saving genetic material from endangered animals right now.
Ok so we should be taking steps to prevent their extinction now I can hear people think. Yes that is happening right now as I write. But is that enough? Can we guarantee to save animals that WE ( as humans) have endangered through our own selfish greed and manipulation of resources and land?
The answer is most probably no!
I for one would not like to see animals ( or any other fauna and flora) that are alive and well now becoming extinct in the future and joining the lists of thousands ( maybe millions) that have died due to the actions of man.
If a species can be saved or a gene pool widened to allow for healthier stock in the future by injecting dna from one species into the egg of a closely matched species, transplanting into a recipient's uterus which in turn becomes a healthy version of the original dna donor, then I cannot see what the moral objection is?

Natural selection is very different though. Weak individuals die and the strong survive.
Natural disasters are another cause of the deaths of countless flora and fauna and morally I feel it is wrong to intervene and try to save a species by cloning in that case. However that is not to say I am against trying to rescue victims ( animals and plants etc) from a potentially lethal situation. Gawd knows we rescue humans and how many billions of them are there on this planet.
If flora and fauna is affected and their very existance threatened by humans' actions then imo I believe humans should be the one to intervene and prevent that annihilation from taking place since they are the ones' responsible for the situation in the first place.
This is a subject very close to my heart hence the reason I studied A level biology and Environmental Science years ago.

Dun4 yes I noticed that about the foal too as I said to OH that its hindquarters looked very full and formed for a foal.
Having said that though I thought it was a cracker

I can understand the owner wanting to do what she did though as sadly gelding operations cannot be reversed and so she had no other way of passing on his genes. Unless of course the dam could be found which is very unlikely.
If the sole reason was to pass on genetic soundness and ability ( in which conformation played a huge part) then that is fine in my book. However if it was done purely for financial gain then no.

In conclusion though a very interesting and thought provoking programme. I especially liked the mice bit at the end as well because my daughter once had a mouse nearly the size of a tennis ball ( no kidding I still have the pics if I scan them on). It was very obese and we took it too the vets and they said they had never seen one as big as that and that she must have had a genetic fault. Considering there were some mice that had faults which made them obese I would say that the mouse we had was very much like them. She seemed healthy enough and lived for just under 2 years and so her size did not really affect her health that much.
I suppose I just find things like that fascinating, at how life can throw up so many oddities.

Caroline

 

[Tia]

It looks like a perfectly normal Quarter Horse foal to me.

I think if you were hoping to clone one of your favourite horses, you'd need to have at least as much money as Charmayne.

 

[lorenababbit]

[ QUOTE ]
It looks like a perfectly normal Quarter Horse foal to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

and to me. not sure if i agree with the principle but really nice foal, thats for sure!

 

[evsj]

I think the programme did, as that giles blokey said, help to dispell some myths and show some of the great things that could be done for the benefit of everyone.
i don't really agree with cloning for the benefit of producing copies of champion horses, it seems to be cheating in a way. Physically the horse may be identical but what about his attitude? does that not count towards his success? so many top competitors say that they can forgive minor conformation faults in a horse and that their atttitude is just as important, when asked what they look for.

 

[Magicmillbrook]

I dont' realy agree with cloning for material benefit. If it can be used for medical gain or to save third world economies then great. Its all a bit too uncertain at thee mo.

As for cloning horses - well how would you ever find 'new' champions. I dont think we should try to replace our beloved equines- you wouldnt dream of cloning a dead husband or wife - or would you...

 

[flyingfeet]

I think its a worthwhile technology to pursue

It means that you can breed from exceptional geldings and horses with a favourable trait (say resistance to EVA etc) could be bred on a larger scale.

 

[silversox]

Thanks, for all of your comments. Yes, I should imagine that Charmaine had pots of money - did you see that barn and the indoor school?! What a place!

The programme was definitely interesting. In fact I think the woman presenter, Olivia Judson, had cloned the voice of Sandi Toksvig! Now that really did grate on me!!!!

 

[Mid]

No... I don't agree with cloning horses. Takes a little bit of the magic out of it, don't you think? Almost as if a lot of admired top horses aren't individuals any more...

 

[gnubee]

Maybe everyone else already knew this, but I thought it was really interesting that genes do not dictate face markings. Can anyone recomend a good book / site on the genetics of colour so I can learn more about it when I have time?