I think it’s interesting they noted the flowers stopped making the new pigment in the wild after 3 years - is it a genetic treatment that requires repeated intervention to maintain the effect?
I’m also guessing the new genes don’t propagate to the seeds as well, so that they can have a steady demand for their special flowers.
Weren't we the ones who breathlessly await any progress on the Riemann hypothesis? A theorem of pure number theory, with no applications.
Breeders pursued it as a challenge. Doing it via genetic engineering probably feels like cheating to them, but the biochemists do it to learn genetic techniques.
From the picture nobody is going to be putting these in a bouquet any time soon. But the accomplishment is neat. And even if it's not. I'm not gonna yuck their yum.
I’m also guessing the new genes don’t propagate to the seeds as well, so that they can have a steady demand for their special flowers.
« Damn good news, Gordon! »
NOW MAYBE BACK TO CANCER?
1,000 labs spending $1M each to cure cancer would likely not progress as far as 10 labs spending $100M each.
Perfecting the techniques around genetic manipulation will likely indirectly help cure cancer.
Doing so on something that has public appeal (and little to no opposition) is less risky than doing it on an animal cell line.
I mean asking us to use different flowers to get our blue colours was just too much.
Breeders pursued it as a challenge. Doing it via genetic engineering probably feels like cheating to them, but the biochemists do it to learn genetic techniques.
From the picture nobody is going to be putting these in a bouquet any time soon. But the accomplishment is neat. And even if it's not. I'm not gonna yuck their yum.