Dino-chicken

They didn't have teeth. When I read this years ago(I want to say 2009) I remember them saying they had to destroy them for ethical reasons but now when I look it up their reasoning is because they didn't survive long enough to hatch.
I think they would have hatched them if they could.

>>2295735
This was a more recent one. I believe 2015 or 2016. I could be wrong.

File: maletin,briefcase,jurassic,world,park,egg,huevo,dryosaurio,compra,venta,criogenizado,hiodrogrno,hidrogen,cryogenetics,masrani,global,ingen,technologics,buy,dinosaurs,sell,concpet,art,desing.jpg (273KB, 1542x1600px)

273KB, 1542x1600px

Are you me OP?
I want a dino chicken more than anyone.

>>2295778
Possibly, you might be my double. We should try to build a dino-chicken!! BUT HOW!?

>>2295786
http://www.the-odin.com
I've been looking at these kits to teach myself genetic engineering. I'm not sure which one to get though, or if it's worth the dough.

File: naked raptor.jpg (23KB, 720x647px)

23KB, 720x647px

Here you go guys, you're mixing up a couple different studies.

The first deals with hen's 'teeth.' they weren't actually teeth, just jagged beak edges the authors interpreted as precursors to teeth. As I recall this chick died from the mutation. The study was published in 2006:

http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822(06)00064-9?_returnURL=http%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0960982206000649%3Fshowall%3Dtrue&cc=y=

Later authors argued that these 'teeth' aren't teeth at all and in fact tooth production in birds is impossible because they've lost 2 of the 4 genes they need:

http://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-8-246

Finally we have the 2015 study where the authors manipulated the activation of genes in embryos to get rid of the beak and widen the snout to a more dinosaur-like shape. These chicks were euthanized for study and also because they have an avian upper palate that isn't fused to the skull roof. This bird palate is useful in birds with beaks because it's mobile, but without the beak the result is indeed like a cleft-palate- the animals would be unable to eat or drink without choking. Study here:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/evo.12684/full

>>2295792
Wow, that's very unfortunate. I hope that they can resolve that issue with the bird palate. I saw a TED talk with Jack Horner, and he said that the hardest part of ressurecting the dinosaur was the tail, that they would need to get an embryonic tail of an alligator and place it on the embryo of the dino-chicken. But apparently the snout, legs, and arms weren't as difficult. I assume they must be having the same problems like the ones in the article you shared. The palate seems tricky, but hopefully some more genetic modification will fix it.

>>2295790
That's really cool! I didn't even know those kits existed. I hope those aren't scams.

>>2295790
nice
but i don't really believe a CRISPR kit would be only 150$

but just from the looks of it, the kits look pretty much like the stuff we use at our genetic labs, just a bit more basic

really interesting

>>2295873
What neat things have you done in your genetics lab?

>>2295792
Thanks for clearing it up, anon. I didn't know someone else was dicking around with it too but I'm also not surprised. Making a live 'dinosaur' feels like it should be a race even at this stage.

>>2296060
nothing too interesting, just basic genetic engineering using D. melanogaster, different Saccharomyces sp. and E. coli.

using diff. methods to replace certain genes and such. Mostly antibiotic resistance and knock-out stuff

These are the things we did/are doing for now, the next few semesters we will do harder/more interesting stuff.

>>2296111
That sounds really cool. What are you majoring in?

>>2295778
>Keeping a fertilized egg refrigerated
Wouldn't that kill the chick?

>>2295790
>Dabbling in genetic engineering from home
What could possibly go wrong?

>>2296073
neither line of research was aimed specifically at horner's dinochicken afaik.

The 'teeth' thing was a random find which they then tested to find the cause. It wasn't engineered to have teeth or anything. Natural mutation.

Research on reshaping chicken beaks has been going on for over a decade now, and again it's not aimed at regressing dinosaurs. The authors realized the tech already exists to make a beak shorter or longer or wider or narrower, so they just took it to the obvious conclusion and produced chickens with no beak at all. Interestingly that caused a widening of the rostrum, which they interpret as a primitive dinosaurian trait.

I remain skeptical since from experience I've never seen a theropod with such a wide rostrum, but kids need their toys.
Reality disagrees though. The wide rostrum isn't a primitive trait because it's not found in theropod dinosaurs in general.

>>2295799
the largest problem is birds use their thigh muscles to breath, and if you change their legs to non-avian ones they'll suffocate.

he'd need to entirely reinvent the lungs, but we don't actually know how non-avian dinosaurs' lungs worked. We don't know which muscles they used to inhale and exhale, we just know they weren't the ones birds use.