| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Monday Poem | Main | Now: The Rest of the Genome »

November 10, 2008

Sarah Palin vs. The Fruit Fly

By Shiban Ganju

Screenhunter_03_nov_10_2241Her mouth stretched with a condescending smile and her face reflected scorn. "You've heard about some of these pet projects, they really don't make a whole lot of sense and sometimes these dollars go to projects that have little or nothing to do with the public good. Things like fruit fly research in Paris, France. I kid you not." With this remark Sara Palin achieved a desirable target: she lost more votes.

Her defeat ensures a reprieve--probably temporary--from her contempt for research on other animals: worms, bacteria, fungi, fish, mice, rats, dogs, pigs, guinea pigs, baboons, monkeys, chimpanzees and many others. With their bodies--dead or alive--scientists have investigated physiology, developed drugs, designed instruments and evolved surgical procedures. The experimental use and abuse of these unwilling partners, especially of higher order animals and primates, has provoked ethical controversies, but the bacteria, fungi, worms and fish, have remained outside our ethical dilemma. These experimental organisms have yielded more fundamental knowledge because at genetic and molecular level some mechanisms stay unaltered in evolution from simple to complex organisms.

Fruit fly has hit the headlines but other lowly, yet equally interesting humble organisms - Caenorhabditis elegans (C elegans), Zebra fish, Escherichia coli (E coli) and many others deserve our gratitude. So much is already known about them because of years of work by thousands of investigators that it will be foolish to abandon them for political expedience.

What makes some organisms favorites for biologists?

Several techniques are in practice to study genes. One of them is to remove a gene or disable it partially or completely. The consequential defect in development defines the function of that gene. Another technique deciphers the DNA sequence and matches its sequence with a gene of a different animal or human. (Common ancestry in evolution has ensured similarity of genes or homologs in deferent species.) To draw any conclusion from these experiments requires animals with short life cycles. Investigators prefer those creatures for molecular and genomic research that develop fast, multiply rapidly and are inexpensive to maintain.

Fruit fly is Drosophila melanogaster - a 3mm long insect- that has been studied for a century, the longest period for any organism. Mutants for many of its 12000 genes are available and exposure to radiation and chemical can induce new mutations.It carries three pairs autosomal chromosomes and an X and Y chromosome. Its half-millimeter egg hatches into a larva, pupa and adult fertile insect in about 12 days. As the larva grows, the numbers of cells stay constant but increase in size to accommodate chromosomes, which divide hundreds of times but remain attached at the stands forming massive chromosomes. Small number of chromosomes, and their thickness at larva stage with light and dark bands make them accessible under a microscope.

Caenorhabditis elegans is a round worm, which lives independently in soil and feeds on bacteria and fungi. This multicellular, 1 mm long worm is transparent and is easy to maintain on a feed of E coli. It is a good model to study developmental, behavioral and neurobiology.

C elegans makes embryos in 12 hours and adults develop in 2.5 days. Total life span is over 2 weeks. It has 959 somatic cells and 302 neurons. Biologists have already mapped the development of all somatic cells and also traced all neural synapses, making it the only organism whose complete neural wiring is known, which makes it prime candidate for the study of neurobiology.

It has a relatively small genome and has 5 pairs of autosomal and 1 or 2 X chromosomes. Investigators have already mapped its 23,399 genes and have developed techniques their manipulation. 35% of its genes have human homologs.

Zebra fish or Danio rerio serves well in the study of vertebrate genetics. They grow from egg to larva in 3 days. The embryo is transparent and develops outside the mother, making it accessible for experiments. They can regenerate skin, heart, fins and even the brain in larval stage making them eminently exciting for the study of healing mechanisms after injury.

A pigmentation gene needed for melanin production in the fish has helped in comparative genomics to identify a similar gene in humans. One base pair difference in this gene differentiates European whites and African blacks.

Recently investigators in Children’s hospital in Boston have developed a new variant of this fish, which has a transparent body. This allows direct visualization of internal organs, production of blood cells and spread of cancer cells almost in real time in the live fish.

Escherichia coli is the workhorse in industrial microbiology. Insertion of an external gene into the Ecoli genome has laid the foundation of biotechnology. The technology helps production of therapeutic proteins. One of the first applications of this recombinant technique was the commercial production of insulin.

These are examples of some humble organisms among many that have improved human health. Scientists working on them deserve more support and not derision.

E coli and other poor organisms may be only four years away from Palin’s contempt, if the rumors of her presidential aspirations are true. She, the proponent of intelligent design, should be aware of another myth: the post election discourse among fruit flies. 

What did one fruit fly say to the other? “If SP is creation of any design, surely it cannot be intelligent.”

Posted by Shiban Ganju at 04:47 PM | Permalink

Comments

Dear Shiban,
I too have been incensed by Palin's remark, and therefore, am grateful for this column. Thank you for paying tribute to the humble creatures who form the backbone of the biological sciences. I especially enjoyed your last sentence; crisp and to the point. All I can say in response is that Sarah Palin is so dumb, if you told her she has lost her mind, she will start looking for it.
Drosophila Zindabad!

Posted by: Azra Raza | Nov 10, 2008 7:39:36 PM

I agree with your sentiment entirely. After reading a little more into the explosion of blog posts that ensued after this particularly offensive gaffe I was interested to learn that she was referring not to Drosophila melanogaster, but to the olive fruit fly (Bactrocera oleae). The research in question was studying how to curb the effects of olive fruit fly infestation on crop yield. The fact that she is criticizing applied research is even more absurd actually. I feel like all the blogs (including mine at tompainesghost.com) were so quick to react to this that no one took the time to realize that the proper common name for Drosophila is vinegar fly or pomace fly NOT "fruit fly." this has been an edifying experience for me. I am not trying to be a science snob here but wanted to pass along a lesson I learned when blogging about this.

No matter what she was talking about I want to be clear. I am not defending her. She and John McCain displayed a blatant disregard for the importance of scientific research throughout the campain. Much of the "pork" McCain proposed cutting would mean putting some scientists out of work. The last thing we need when creationism is still being debated in US high schools. I like your passion for science and hope that it is contagious to those around you!

Posted by: Kris Hite | Nov 10, 2008 9:08:35 PM

Very informative, thank you Shiban.

Posted by: Shabbir | Nov 11, 2008 12:33:52 PM

I think this is a bit overblown...Republicans like Palin do have many issues with science, but so long as it isn't shoved in their face or contradict their preconceptions they are often willing to fund basic research. Bush did many awful things, but he didn't exactly cut funding to NIH. I don't think there's too strong an inference from 'Democratic president' to 'more science funding'. Closer to my field anyway, it was Democrats who canceled the Superconducting Supercollider.

I'm assuming if someone had told Palin fruit flies are actually very important she'd have used a different example of pork barrel waste. It wouldn't have been much, but I daresay she'd have fallen back on overhead projectors for planetariums.

It is worrying of course that this horrifying candidate didn't hear 'fruit fly' and immediately think 'model organism', but we ARE talking about someone who can't name a newspaper.

Posted by: D | Nov 11, 2008 12:56:01 PM

I would be interested in Prof Dawkins thoughts on this ;¬)

regards,

Sarah (NOT Palin!)

Posted by: Sarah | Nov 12, 2008 4:44:19 AM

D- It's safe to say that a lot of politicians are dense when it comes to science, but I think it's also safe to say that Bush/McCain/et al have a pretty specific agenda that includes stamping out science progress. The NIH isn't the only funding agency that has been affected by this administration. Look to Fermilab for an example of what lack of funding of science can create.

Posted by: Allison | Nov 14, 2008 9:56:15 PM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

3QD Politics Prize


Donate to Todd Shea

More info about Todd Shea and his work here on 3QD.

3QD ADVERTISING


3QD on Facebook


3QD on Twitter


Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google


Recent Comments

Dredd on buruma on the swiss

Randolyn Zinn on Brian D'Amato: Mayan Sci-Fi and the Tribe of True -- Not Aspirant -- Nerds

Lambness on the fugitive spirit of Zomia

Andrea on FASTER, TERPSICHORE, FASTER! On Frederick Wiseman’s new documentary La Danse: The Paris Opera Ballet (Zipporah Films)

Lambness on Why Your Older Brother Didn't Share

Namit on Early Islam, Part 2: The Golden Age

Picador on What Is 'Non-Western' Philosophy?

fourcultures on Critical thinking may lead to misogyny!

fourcultures on What Is 'Non-Western' Philosophy?

Barbara on Brian D'Amato: Mayan Sci-Fi and the Tribe of True -- Not Aspirant -- Nerds

Harriet on Brian D'Amato: Mayan Sci-Fi and the Tribe of True -- Not Aspirant -- Nerds

Cyrus Hall on Critical thinking may lead to misogyny!

Sue Hubbard on Brian D'Amato: Mayan Sci-Fi and the Tribe of True -- Not Aspirant -- Nerds

Chris Schoen on Psychological Science: Measurement, Uncertainty, and Determinism – Part 1

billy on Critical thinking may lead to misogyny!

John Ballard on The health-care bill has no master plan for curbing costs. Is that a bad thing?

Daniel Rourke on Brian D'Amato: Mayan Sci-Fi and the Tribe of True -- Not Aspirant -- Nerds

Muhammad Saadullah Munir on Early Islam, Part 2: The Golden Age

sufi on An excellent charitable cause for this season of giving!

sufi on An excellent charitable cause for this season of giving!

OT on Brian D'Amato: Mayan Sci-Fi and the Tribe of True -- Not Aspirant -- Nerds

Larry Poss on Brian D'Amato: Mayan Sci-Fi and the Tribe of True -- Not Aspirant -- Nerds

holly alderman on Brian D'Amato: Mayan Sci-Fi and the Tribe of True -- Not Aspirant -- Nerds

Namit on Critical thinking may lead to misogyny!

billy on Critical thinking may lead to misogyny!


Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.


The 3QD Prizes


Logos designed by Vicki Winters

Subscribe to this blog's feed