Jump to content

Fish or frankenfish?

REELJERKS

REELJERKS
in Open Lake Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Gator

Gator

Posted
Posted

If the fish are growing that much faster, there must be metabolic differences that would be reflected in the nutrient value of the fillets. However, these differences are likely to be less significant than the differences between swordfish and tuna.

In point of fact, your body does it's own "genetic engineering" every day to allow you to respond to environmental stressors, turning on or off different programs that allow you to survive and adapt.

The bottom line is that, in my opinion, these fish are certainly safe to eat.

Gator

Link to comment
Share on other sites
muskybob

muskybob

Posted
Posted

The food industry has always found ways to make animals bulk up for market, cows give more milk, hens laying more eggs, veggies to grow bigger, etc. Altering the DNA is another way of doing it without adding all the chemicals. Whether it's safe or not remains to be seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LongLine

LongLine

Posted
Posted

Okay so let me get this straight…you’re asking opinions on eating:

1. A fish that’ going to be

- genetically engineered

- tank reared in purified water

- corn & soy pellet fed

- pampered by “hatchery†staff

- pumped full of fish medicine and

- probably costs a bit over $12/Lb.

Or

2. A fish that

- grew up eating bugs

- lived in peril all its life from bigger fish & lampreys

- had to dodge fish diseases such as VHS

- carries a fish consumption advisory

- has to have its polluted fat cut off before cooking

- does cost a bit over $60/Lb (the way I fish lately)

For me there’s no choice……..I’d go for a Big Mac. :D;)

Kidding aside, I don't see anything wrong with it. People eat the strangest stuff. They should put some kind of label on it though so people know what they're buying.

I question I'd ask the bio is will it live as long as the "normal" fish or will it's metabolism do it in, in 1/2 the normal life span.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deaf Fisherman

Deaf Fisherman

Posted
Posted

thats sound like awesome thing to do but there are alot of pro and cons.. hopefully, they will be leaned to more of pros so we can look forward to breaking 50 barrier in lake ontario!

if they can do that why arent they do that to sunfish, bass, catfish! it will be definitely more interesting to catch them all day with monster size fish! more fun for me and alot positive for charter captain if they taken out fishing for them!

so let wait and see what happen from there!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Self Censored

Self Censored

Posted
Posted

Tom,

You asked the right question. No farmer wants to feed twice as much for the same amount of time -- therefore I am sure that the fish will be raised to a larger size in a shorter time span.

As to them ever being in LO: Transgenic organisms should not be confused with their natural dna donors. You will never see this type of organism in the wild.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GAMBLER

GAMBLER

Posted
Posted
Tom,

You asked the right question. No farmer wants to feed twice as much for the same amount of time -- therefore I am sure that the fish will be raised to a larger size in a shorter time span.

As to them ever being in LO: Transgenic organisms should not be confused with their natural dna donors. You will never see this type of organism in the wild.

Never say never. Some "bucket biologist" will dump one somewhere it does not belong. Or they will be farm raised and escape into the river system they are raised on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gator

Gator

Posted
Posted

So, here's an interesting tidbit: in the past they've induced what's called "polyploidy" or extra sets of chromosomes by heat shocking fertilized eggs. Normally we have two sets of each chromosome. Heat shock results in three sets (no extra DNA, just more copies of our normal repertoire of chromosomes). This results in fish that grow big fast but are sterile. It's likely that we've all caught and maybe even eaten these fish from Lake O.

As for the reproduction issue, I actually think that the Frankenfish, unlike the heat-shocked fish, is fertile. Inserting new DNA into the genome isn't as simple as it sounds and can't be accomplished en mass yet. This means that in order to get a population you have to be able to breed.

For example, when we're talking about transgenic mice (where something's been inserted) or knockout mice (where an endogenous gene has been removed) they can generally reproduce, so I would think the same applies to fish...got to admit I'm not 100% certain since I'm not a fish biologist but it's tough to envision genetically how they'd be sterile...you'd have to "engineer" each subsequent generation. Not cost effective. Maybe they heat shock the Frankenfish eggs, leaving a few carefully regulated breeders? Still, if there are some escapees from the sterilization process or the holding tanks, it's certainly possible that these fish could enter the wild. That's what's happened to a few genetically engineered crops in the past years.

aka Jurassic Park, "Nature will find a way".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
on the lam

on the lam

Posted
Posted

They better be careful what they do in the lab, ya never know what you might get

We took both these freaks on the same am trip. My brother in law landed these two within an hour of each other.

A 30# genetic monster with a face only his mother could love. :lol:

16f91159.jpg

This must be a relative with different issues :o

05215516.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shadster

shadster

Posted
Posted
http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g96/pshell/a1/05215516.jpg

Is that you ELMO!

It is a hungry world that would have starved to death by now without the tinkering by man.

lol you know the one and only ELMO?

Yes, I know you from that train wreck (at times) of a website NJH, lol. I am X7 there...

Nice fish you caught in the derby :yes: (notice the ever popular way over used thumbs up ?:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
on the lam

on the lam

Posted
Posted
http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g96/pshell/a1/05215516.jpg

Is that you ELMO!

It is a hungry world that would have starved to death by now without the tinkering by man.

lol you know the one and only ELMO?

Yes, I know you from that train wreck (at times) of a website NJH, lol. I am X7 there...

Nice fish you caught in the derby :yes: (notice the ever popular way over used thumbs up ?:)

Im not ELMO, thats my brother in law. He comes up every year for some fun. :yes::beer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Self Censored

Self Censored

Posted
Posted

I guess it is a good idea to read the article before commenting. The article says the fish will be sterile, and only female, and that the GH is from the Chinook and the species being manipulated is "like" the Atlantic.

I guess we already have the fish in our lake that has the 24/7 growth hormone ................. we call it a King!

Hope this helps.

I am trying to figure out which is larger a nucleic acid or an amino acid .... reason would tell me that the NA is bigger, but I suppose it does not have to be the case. I figured I would ask here because this is relevant to this post

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LongLine

LongLine

Posted
Posted

What's bigger a pound of lead or a pound of feathers? ;) A gallon of this used to be the same size as a gallon of that. :):):)

An amino molecule is larger than the NA, however the NA string can be larger. This of course goes by volume and not necessarily mass. (weight) I leave it up to the student to add up all the atomic weights to determine the exact mass to volume ratios.(assume earth's gravitational field)

Tom B.

(LongLine)

p.s. hint: 14 ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Trap Jaw

Trap Jaw

Posted
Posted

I love hearing all these people gripe about genetically engineered species.

Uh, if I'm not mistaken we've been genetically engineering plants and animals for centuries. Granted now it's by gene splicing, where it was selective breeding in the past. No different, other then one is slower then the other.

If people don't want genetically manipulated food, eat dirt, it's the only thing that hasn't been altered

Take one of the most recognized crops on this continent, corn. Just a few centuries ago the maize plant looked more like a weed. With selective breeding we ended up with what we have today.

If it weren't for the fact that I cannot even stand to get salmon close to my mouth, I'd eat the frankenfish.

Please, don't go there. I love catching them, hate eating them. I'd rather chew on my boot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gator

Gator

Posted
Posted

Ha! It's a trick question...it all depends on which amino acids are coded for by the nucleic acid, whether we're talking DNA or RNA, and codon choice for any given amino acid.

I'm with On the Lam...10990.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...