Thoughts on clones? Would this bother you?

P

Patterdale

Well-Known Member
Joined
28 December 2009
Messages
7,740
Location
Wherever I lay my hat.
Visit site
I’m looking for a youngster to keep to eventually event. I’ve seen a beauty - but it’s by a clone of a very successful eventer.

I’m not sure how I feel about this! Would it bother you!?

I don’t know why but it just feels a bit odd to me?
 
It was something I was thinking about the other day!
I’m afraid I didn’t reach any useful conclusion I’m afraid.
I’m semi looking for a young filly and I saw a nice one by a clone which set me off thinking. I need to research it further
 
Murkas Gem, a clone of Gem Twist.
The jumping and the TB is interesting to me. Murkas Gem himself is small and quite thick set though.
 
ycbm said:
It would bother me. I don't think it is yet clear whether clones are as healthy as other horses, live as long, or that any DNA copying mistakes in the clone are not passed on to offspring.

I would be more likely to buy if the sire was twenty years old than if it was five, for example.


.
Click to expand...
Thats is a really good point!
 
ihatework said:
Murkas Gem, a clone of Gem Twist.
The jumping and the TB is interesting to me. Murkas Gem himself is small and quite thick set though.
Click to expand...

Gemini has some really nice young ones coming through, I would have something by him for sure
 
Patterdale said:
I’m looking for a youngster to keep to eventually event. I’ve seen a beauty - but it’s by a clone of a very successful eventer.

I’m not sure how I feel about this! Would it bother you!?

I don’t know why but it just feels a bit odd to me?
Click to expand...

If it's the clone I think it is then no, I wouldn’t, but mostly because I don’t rate him highly as a stallion in his own right, not because he's a clone
 
Dolly the sheep died early, yes, plus there was a lot of talk about early onset arthritis. I think it’s worth considering, but does the cloning aspect not increase the price to a crazy level? God, I’d have had a clone of my wb in a flash, although they won’t necessarily be anything like each other re character. Maybe if I could transplant Beau’s brain into a 17hh dope on a rope?!
 
I'd happily do it. I wouldn't want the actual clone because of the aging problems they had with earlier attempts - I don't know enough about it to know if those have been solved but I'm pretty sure the offspring of a clone wouldn't have the same problems. They were to do with telomeres (the ends of the chromosomes) which reset in the reproductive cells (the sperm in this case). If I had Valegro I would clone him tomorrow!
 
I've met Murka's Gem a couple of times, and he seemed a lot smaller than his listed height to me. However, the horse I was riding at the time was 17.2hh, so my sense of height may have been skewed! From what I saw, he had a nice temperament and was easy enough to handle.

However, the fact that the clone came out so different to the original does kind of make me wonder how worthwhile the whole palaver is.

I don't think I'd completely rule out a horse on the grounds of its sire being a clone, but it would definitely be a con rather than a pro. It's such new technology that it's difficult to predict what effect it's going to have.
 
I didn't know there existed any cloned stallions out there.

I just had a quick look at you tubes of Gem Twist and Murka's Gem, and one looks much bigger than the other. Then I thought, the clone won't have been installed in the orignal's mother, but some other mare, so the resultant foal will be a different height if his surrogate mother is smaller, I suspect.

Id'd rather the real McCoy than some clone.
 
It’s not for me , I haven’t read any papers or have any knowledge on the subject whatsoever. It just seems wrong to me .
 
I do think it’s fascinating and will keep an eye on how these clones do. It’s good they can compete FEI and I really do think that the owners of these clones need to get them out there proving themselves (although the cynic in me can imagine there is a lot to loose by doing that ?).

I can’t imagine I’d ever be interested (short term at least) in using clones of stallions for which you have useful progengy to use instead. Examples would be horses like Jazz and Cruising. The only thing in their favour is that you know there is an element of strength in those genes performance wise which the likes of clones from geldings haven’t yet proven.

Cloning the stallion of a successful gelding is fascinating experimentally - examples being Murkas Gem and Tomatillo among others. The problem is there are so many factors that come into play to have a successful top sports horse, genetics only being a part of it. A big jigsaw puzzle where all the parts have to fit together.

In a big breeding operation I can see why one might be able to take a gamble and try out a clone. I think I’m more in the ‘no’ camp for now but will continue to keep half an eye for interest sake
 
My only knowledge of it was the Cruising clones which did interest me. Cruising was known for not being the easiest stallion to ride and there was a lot of interviews at the time that if he hadnt of ended up with Trevor Coyle, he might have not have reached his now known potential. I know plenty of people who has Cruising offspring or bloodlines and they are known for being quirky, so need a certain type of rider to get the best out of them. So with the clones, it was interesting to see how they will progress because its seemed to be some of nurture rather than the nature that helped him reach his greatness!!

And then of course the obvious unknown health implications - which science cant really know until more time has passed, I'm not sure I would want to be part of that experiment. But it is no doubt very interesting.
 
ycbm said:
I couldn't be so sure of that, there are some weird effects caused by epigenetic markers on the DNA that get passed through generations.

.
Click to expand...
But you could say that for anything, not just for clones. I'm not sure that epigenetics would work any differently for them. The thing about telomeres is that the definitely do - they sort of get worn away by age (numbers of replications) so by producing an embryo from chromosomes with adult-length telomeres you end up with a shorter lifespan, or at least that seemed to be the explanation for the early problems with clones. That doesn't apply in the offspring of clones though, the telomeres are reset in the gametes. You could maybe even argue that a clone might have more desirable epigenetics because it would be less likely to have suffered any traumatic experiences during its more sheltered life compared to an animal that had to 'prove' itself....
 
soloequestrian said:
But you could say that for anything, not just for clones. I'm not sure that epigenetics would work any differently for them. The thing about telomeres is that the definitely do - they sort of get worn away by age (numbers of replications) so by producing an embryo from chromosomes with adult-length telomeres you end up with a shorter lifespan, or at least that seemed to be the explanation for the early problems with clones. That doesn't apply in the offspring of clones though, the telomeres are reset in the gametes. You could maybe even argue that a clone might have more desirable epigenetics because it would be less likely to have suffered any traumatic experiences during its more sheltered life compared to an animal that had to 'prove' itself....
Click to expand...


I understand what you are saying but I believe that the failure rate in clone embryo production shows that there is far more potential for copying errors in the production of a clone than by natural embryo production, even if done in vitro. And those errors might not show up until later in the life of the clone and maybe not until later generations.

I can't see any point in taking the risk unless the offspring are very cheap.

I wonder how the insurers view them, anyone know?

.
 
Last edited:
ponynutz said:
The potential will have been cloned but surely his maximum potential depends on the rider?
Click to expand...

Not always. If you look at racing and see how many full siblings relate to each others performances on the track there is usually one super star in the family, a few decent ones and a bunch of guff. The good ones go to stud but passing on their brilliance isn't always guaranteed. Nothing is. So a clone might not actually be as good as the original even given the exact same upbringing. As has been proven they tend to look different, behave differently, they are their own being. You would never know they were a clone if you stood it and it's original copy side by side.
 
ycbm said:
I understand what you are saying but I believe that the failure rate in clone embryo production shows that there is far more potential for copying errors in the production of a clone than by natural embryo production, even if done in vitro. And those errors might not show up until later in the life of the clone and maybe not until later generations.

I can't see any point in taking the risk unless the offspring are very cheap.

I wonder how the insurers view them, anyone know?

.
Click to expand...

Could you link me to your research sources on this (sorry I’m being lazy) but am interested
 
I don’t have much knowledge of it, other than the fact that it’s fairly common in the polo world so I have met and ridden a fair few clones.

I’m not sure I know enough about it to have an opinion either way, but I do find it fascinating!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top