At 04:57 PM 10/07/00 +0200, Joao Pedro de Magalhaes wrote:
>Finally, there was a Korean team that
>also used in vitro aged cells and found that they were better for cloning.
>Of course that you can argue that in vitro aged cells are not the same thing
>as in vivo
Well, oooobviously they're not. Except for telomere length, presumably,
which either gets reset or isn't sufficiently degraded (a la Dolly) to
prevent a generation or two of cloning. (They're not exposed to the
accumulating damage and wear&tear due to being part of a metabolising soma.)
Damien Broderick
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:34:22 MDT