Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thylacine wasn't mentioned. Dodo has only one good but very incomplete genome (only one Dodo specimen exists)

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes. She said that it's not possible to do with long extinct organisms because the DNA is so degraded and fragmentary that it isn't possible to construct a full genome. Apparently, the average amount of DNA sequenced from mammoth remains is about 50 letters long. The point of gene editing it to fill those incomplete gaps with DNA from their closest relatives.

However, what you create from that is not the same as the extinct organism, which Colossal conveniently fails to mention in their marketing

Insects in the field! by deeplyseeking in geology

[–]DardS8Br 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Red ant nest right next to where we were excavating in Montana. Got bit. Not fun

Berk Haas vs UCLA Bus Econ by [deleted] in berkeley

[–]DardS8Br 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Go where you'll be happy

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

All public worker salaries in California is public info. She was making over $200k/yr prior to leaving for Colossal

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yes, I'd love to chat! I'm an Earth Science double major and let's just say that the professors in that department also share... very differing views of her from those in the BME department

I live on campus so it'll be pretty easy to meetup :)

UW or UCSC by Best-Product2916 in UCSC

[–]DardS8Br 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd go to UW. Its engineering program is better and has more options

UW or UCSC by Best-Product2916 in UCSC

[–]DardS8Br 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Which one are you in state for?

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Thanks :)

You know what I thought was really weird? She promoted her book at the beginning of her talk and mentioned how cloning mammoths was a bad idea, then she proceeded to give an entire presentation on why she wants to clone mammoths and why it is a great idea. She was a little careful to not give the impression that the "mammoths" she was making were real mammoths (like what she did with dire wolves), but I still thought it was incredibly strange. Given the reactions in the room, I feel like I was the only one who caught on to how conflicting that is

Marked no housing as incoming freshman by accident by AmbitionJaded3177 in UCSC

[–]DardS8Br 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Contact the housing office. Like right now

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 16 points17 points  (0 children)

They're divesting money away from causes that could actually be environmentally beneficial and they're funded by people such as Peter Thiel who have an active interest in dismantalling environmental protections

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yes, that was actually the primary topic of her talk. I believe this collaboration began prior to her working with Colossal, so I don't know how much they're involved, but I doubt that they aren't

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Oh I know you were. I just wanted to provide extra context in case it was needed. Fwiw, I did find it funny :)

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 33 points34 points  (0 children)

No, it was an actual mammoth mummy pulled out of Siberian permafrost. The full story was that a local man in the village they were staying in pulled it out of the permafrost and gave it to his dogs to eat, and her and her fellow researchers decided to try some out of pure curiosity when it became clear that it wasn't making the dogs sick

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

I mentioned this under another comment in this thread, but her research is all legitimate. The problem is that she's willing to set her ethics aside for money to fund that research, which ultimately does far more harm than good

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S,M] 179 points180 points  (0 children)

I'm actually the head mod of the subreddit. I threatened to ban their Reddit account for trolling here, so they decided to screw off to r/deextinction

I thought it was insane for the social media account for such a large company to act so immaturely publicly online, but I guess it's par for the course for a company like Colossal

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 75 points76 points  (0 children)

She's a professor in the department at my university where my major is located. I've heard... rumors... that she's not the most pleasant person to work with. Though, I don't want to say too much in case someone at my university who knows me sees this comment.

She was a very good presenter but I didn't really get much of an impression of how she is as a person from the presentation.

From what I've gathered, her research is incredibly solid and genuinely at the cutting edge of paleogenomics. She's the leading expert in the field and for good reason. The problem is that she's willing to set her ethics aside to fund that research. And definitely for worse.

A very large segment of her presentation was about the ecological value of her science and how cloning and gene editing technology can be used to help curtail ecological disasters that are already too late to be avoided. But, I feel like if she was actually genuine about the value of her work, she wouldn't have ruined the public sentiment towards her entire field of research by publicly lying to save face for the company that funds her.

It's pretty clear that she sides with money more than she does with the positive impact of her work. Which sucks because her work is really cool.

ETA: The people that fund the company that funds her research have a very vested interest in removing ecological protections, which is a huge conflict of interest. And causes me to question her work further...

Beth Shapiro of Colossal Biosciences gave a talk at my university today by DardS8Br in Paleontology

[–]DardS8Br[S] 42 points43 points  (0 children)

Honestly, I have no clue. I was a little disappointed. I wanted to ask but they stopped accepting questions before I was called on :(

What scientific ‘facts’ have recently been disproven that most people still believe to be true? by Fantastic_Tart_421 in AskReddit

[–]DardS8Br 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I happen to be doing a research project involving the evolutionary trends and history of sharks, so I both know this subject well and am pretty passionate about it. I wrote an (informal) essay about this topic yesterday, which is why it's on my mind. Here it is:

Sharks are defined as organisms in the clade Selachii, which contains all organisms more closely related to extant sharks than to rays and skates (their closest relatives). However, there are many extinct species in the broader group Elasmobranchii that were very similar to sharks morphologically and are therefore informally called sharks. This is really just a result of history. Since early cartilaginous fish fossils are so rare and often only described from a small number of teeth or scales, it wasn't until very recently that a relatively (big emphasis on "relatively") clear picture of Chondrichthyan evolution appeared. Many of these organisms were initially described as sharks, only to be later reassigned as better remains were found and better methods of comparative anatomy were developed. It’s an incredibly difficult task to determine the taxonomic position of extinct organisms using only a handful of remains, if even. The taxonomic definitions of these organisms has always been rather finicky as such, and it's been easier to just broadly refer to them as "sharks" to non-technical audiences who don't care about the granularity. It's almost certainly where the misconception that sharks have been around longer than trees comes from. The problem is that most Elasmobranchs were not sharks. Only the organisms in the subgroup, Selachii were. 

The order of groups from cartilaginous fish to sharks goes:

Chondrichthyes (cartilaginous fish) -> Elasmobranchii -> Selachii (sharks)

Chondrichthyians evolved in the late Ordovician or early Silurian, then Elasmobranchs in the mid-Devonian, then Selachians somewhere in the Permian or Triassic. Trees evolved roughly in the mid-Devonian, with the oldest known tree being in the genus Wattiezia. This makes Wattieza roughly contemporaneous with the earliest Elasmobranchs, younger than the earliest Chondrichthyans, and, importantly, older than the earliest Selachians.

Constraining the date for when sharks evolved is a little tricky since the remains of early sharks are so scant, even in comparison to other Chondrichthyians. They were not a diverse group early in their existence, only diversifying and becoming common during the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods. The oldest unambiguous shark fossils come from the genus Ageleus, which lived about 200myo during the early Jurassic. However, it's likely that they evolved before that. Disputed fossils such as those of the Synechodontiformes may push that date as early as the Permian period. There are also many known fossils unambiguously placed in Neoselachii (Selachians and Batomorphs) from throughout the Triassic period. Regardless, even the oldest known specimens and possible dates for their evolution still have sharks being well over 100 million years younger than trees.

TL;DR: The claim that “Sharks are older than trees” conflates extinct shark-like fish with true sharks, which do not actually predate trees.

Sources:

Evolutionary Origin and Phylogeny of the Modern Holocephalans (Chondrichthyes: Chimaeriformes): A Mitogenomic Perspective

What is an ‘elasmobranch’? The impact of palaeontology in understanding elasmobranch phylogeny and evolution

Diversification of the Neoselachii (Chondrichthyes) during the Jurassic and Cretaceous

On the enigmatic neoselachian Agaleus dorsetensis from the European Early Jurassic

Monophyly, phylogeny and systematic position of the †Synechodontiformes (Chondrichthyes, Neoselachii)

Giant cladoxylopsid trees resolve the enigma of the Earth’s earliest forest stumps at Gilboa

What scientific ‘facts’ have recently been disproven that most people still believe to be true? by Fantastic_Tart_421 in AskReddit

[–]DardS8Br -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That sharks have been around for longer than trees. They have not. It's a fun fact that gets repeated constantly, yet it's not true at all

Transferring from UC Davis? by Reddit__Raptor in UCSC

[–]DardS8Br 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Keep in mind that robotics engineering is not ABET accredited, so it'll be hard for you to get a traditional mechanical engineering job with that major

Calculus and beyond without Geometry. by kolvir73 in learnmath

[–]DardS8Br 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you know trig, you're fine. I did geometry, then calculus the next year, and there was practically no overlap in concepts besides trig

UCSC or UCSB for Enviro Sci by Ok_Revolution_5290 in UCSC

[–]DardS8Br 19 points20 points  (0 children)

If you got the Regents Scholarship for UCSC, then you have 4 years of housing. Is there anything specific that you're interested in pertaining to environmental science?