Is there a way for us to construct molecules from atoms in a

>>8244452
You'll need nitrogen too. Nature does it with things called ribosomes.

>>8244452
>Is there a way for us to construct molecules from atoms in a very precise way?
Going to go out on a limb here and say that this may result in catastrophe-level explosions attempting to do this via current knowledge.

>>8244452
Polypeptide synthesis has been automated - look up 'solid phase peptide synthesis'.
There are limits to that technology.

There's a guy at UIUC (Burke) who is automating C-C bond formation using iterative Suzuki coupling. He has a prototype synthesizer and published a paper in Science a year or so ago.

Even without automation some impressive molecules have been made synthetically.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palytoxin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brevetoxin

>>8244457
how hard would it be to get something in nature to slightly modify a compound it already makes?
same body with a different R or two
are we to this point in bioengineering yet?

>>8244466
come back a bit, you're currently on a tightrope over the grand canyon

>>8244473
>how hard would it be to get something in nature to slightly modify a compound it already makes?
>same body with a different R or two
>are we to this point in bioengineering yet?
Currently its possible, but its pretty advanced stuff and is pretty small scale.

What you're proposing requires a number of steps that can each be a significant body of research in themselves. After choosing the compound you want it requires you to:

>Determine the species that produces it
>Determine the protein (or protein system) that produces it
>Express the protein/s in a cell line such that the desired function i.e. molecule production, is retained
>Determine the functional residues in the enzyme necessary for binding/folding/reacting with the compound
>Manipulate the cDNA expressing the protein such that the resulting protein is still functional and can produce a modified form of the compound you're interested in
>Farm up the recombinant enzymes in some kind of cell line
>Harvest the compound

It takes a huge amount of work to the point that there is currently no drug on the planet that is so precious that this process would be more economically viable than by farming and harvesting the natural species. This of course is mostly due to the novelty of the field at the moment however and as we get more experience in producing compounds in this way it may well become viable to produce some rare compounds in this way.

If you want to learn more about it I recommend looking up the research of Professor Birger Lindberg Moller. I'd say he's one of the leading figures in this type of natural/synthetic biology. I've been to a few of his talks when he came to my university and had a glass of wine with him. Nice guy. Passionate about the field.

>>8244636
I mean when I do it it seems a lot easier then what you described. The hardest part is to determine is what you want to do. If you have a bacteria with the right machinery it's really easy cause all you need is a plasmid. If you need to actually edit the bacterial DNA you can do that too although it would require CRISPR but that's pretty cheap 200$>. Doing it with an animal or plant is harder, you can do plant easier then animal because it doesn't require implantation in a uterus.

>>8244636
Also we get insulin from giant vats of bacteria dude.

>>8244452

Lol did you get that from TINKER?

>>8244452
Yes, it's called chemistry. Would you like to know more?

File: Lysergamides.svg.png (53KB, 756x1024px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 756x1024px

>>8244884
can crisper get the fungus that produces this to switch out some of these Rs?
for science

This threa is triggering my autism

>>8244452
no

>>8244469
these peptide synthesizers are not what OP is talking about. With these machines, chemists discover a synthesis, program it into the machine, load the reagents, then it goes through all the steps by itself. I've actually seen one IRL before, pretty cool.

>>8244473
some enzymes are capable of doing that, but only for very specific molecules and processes. forming C-C bonds is very difficult. you dont just "switch the group out".

>>8244973
I'm not really familiar with the crispr, but im pretty sure it only deals with gene sequences. there is no machine that can just "switch out some of these Rs". Actually, I bet i can get a good laugh out of my group if I tell them that tomorrow.

>>8244951
this guy gets it.

>>8247027
>I bet i can get a good laugh out of my group
The smart ones will not laugh, realizing that this is in fact the ultimate goal you are all actually striving for.

>>8244951
ayy lmao
fucking idiots on /sci/

>>8247041
we are years and years and years away from such a goal. It's the same ultimate goal as intergalactic travel is