It's amazing how scientists and chemist would spend so much effort and time for conducting researches and discover the unknown...There is just so much work! Couldn't agree more that science has been of contribution to society, making life more comfortable and quality.
I am confused, he said that smith's work was to insert the gene of interest, mass produced it (assuming the great variety of phage are expressed), and then plucked it out of the phage pool. Isn't just regular cloning?
How difficult would it be to use this method to get bacteria to produce morphine? Could this work to get an organism to produce a lot more of something it already makes, about a thousand times more? There is a parasite worm that produces morphine in very tiny amounts, if the worm could produce a thousand times more than it already does , then it may be a practical way of farming morphine, far more efficient than growing Poppy's.
And how that enzyme directed evolution is related to evolution of species. Can anyone explain? I don't know how this is called evolution when you force something into a new universe and while adapting itself to that change. As i understood from all I read, evolution is a big change of our proteins which are directly related to make RNA then DNA....Someone to help me understand this thanks in advance.
It's called "directed evolution" because they are controlling the conditions under which it occurs, hence "directed." In nature evolution is completely random.
evolution of species come from mutations changing enzymes so much that they do different things. With directed evolution, we go in and keep adding mutations in a lab until the enzymes do the task that we want it to do. We take something that would take millions of years and do it in less than a week. Here's more information on it sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2018/chemistry-nobel-evolving-proteins-better-medicines-biofuels/
@@Russianboyz95 No, natural and directed evolution are conceptually very similar. In both cases there are plenty of random mutations in the genome are generated. Then while nature selects the mutant that would best survive in that environment, in directed evolution the scientist selects the mutant that best matches the desired property (e.g. an enzyme that functions normally in a harsher environment).
In principle what they did was really the opposite of evolution, I agree. Randomness would on average create zillions of bacteria thatbthe whole universe may not fit before reaching the desired one. They controlled everything from destination point to amounts of mutation and precise places of mutations too. This puts many questions on the validity of evolution as a scientific explanation 🙄
Could you use directed evolution to develop materials? Like evolve a mycelium for electrical conductivity and see if it produces a material that's a better conductor than copper.
Yeah. Phage display has been used is various vaccines and therapies. I would say it is better than the hybridoma technique. Although, mRNA vaccines will probably see an upsurge now.
It's amazing how scientists and chemist would spend so much effort and time for conducting researches and discover the unknown...There is just so much work! Couldn't agree more that science has been of contribution to society, making life more comfortable and quality.
Yes it's more fascinating about chemistry
I am confused, he said that smith's work was to insert the gene of interest, mass produced it (assuming the great variety of phage are expressed), and then plucked it out of the phage pool. Isn't just regular cloning?
How difficult would it be to use this method to get bacteria to produce morphine?
Could this work to get an organism to produce a lot more of something it already makes, about a thousand times more? There is a parasite worm that produces morphine in very tiny amounts, if the worm could produce a thousand times more than it already does , then it may be a practical way of farming morphine, far more efficient than growing Poppy's.
It's been done in yeast, but not very efficiently science.sciencemag.org/content/349/6252/1095
It seems that he had already known that the chemistry nobel comes to lithium battery this year.
And how that enzyme directed evolution is related to evolution of species. Can anyone explain? I don't know how this is called evolution when you force something into a new universe and while adapting itself to that change. As i understood from all I read, evolution is a big change of our proteins which are directly related to make RNA then DNA....Someone to help me understand this thanks in advance.
It's called "directed evolution" because they are controlling the conditions under which it occurs, hence "directed." In nature evolution is completely random.
evolution of species come from mutations changing enzymes so much that they do different things. With directed evolution, we go in and keep adding mutations in a lab until the enzymes do the task that we want it to do. We take something that would take millions of years and do it in less than a week. Here's more information on it sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2018/chemistry-nobel-evolving-proteins-better-medicines-biofuels/
@@Russianboyz95 No, natural and directed evolution are conceptually very similar. In both cases there are plenty of random mutations in the genome are generated. Then while nature selects the mutant that would best survive in that environment, in directed evolution the scientist selects the mutant that best matches the desired property (e.g. an enzyme that functions normally in a harsher environment).
In principle what they did was really the opposite of evolution, I agree. Randomness would on average create zillions of bacteria thatbthe whole universe may not fit before reaching the desired one. They controlled everything from destination point to amounts of mutation and precise places of mutations too. This puts many questions on the validity of evolution as a scientific explanation 🙄
Could you use directed evolution to develop materials? Like evolve a mycelium for electrical conductivity and see if it produces a material that's a better conductor than copper.
In theory, you could. I always wanted to study to what extent evolution can go.
Was that last comment a crack about Goodenough?
It was.
Sounds like Gain of Function...
ျမန္မာသတင္းအစံု
3:50 .... and two years later we have lots of women in 2020 winning the nobel prize
interesting.... vaccine component perhaps?
Yeah. Phage display has been used is various vaccines and therapies. I would say it is better than the hybridoma technique. Although, mRNA vaccines will probably see an upsurge now.
his voice keeps cracking lol