The Congress of Geneticists and Breeders begins
Genetics of the Russian Federation is based on people who do not think of life without scienceRIA Novosti, 21.06.2009
The largest forum of Russian geneticists is the Congress of Geneticists and Breeders dedicated to the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin, and the 5th Congress of the Vavilov Society of Geneticists and Breeders opens on June 22. Chairman of the Organizing Committee of the Congress, Director of the N.I. Vavilov Institute of General Genetics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Biological Sciences Nikolay Yankovsky told RIA Novosti about the main successes and prospects of genetics, as well as the state of Russian research in this area. Ilya Ferapontov was talking.
– Could you name the key topics that geneticists will discuss?– The key problem posed in the emergence of genetics is the problem of the connection of genotype with phenotype, that is, how genetic instructions (genes) are related to the result, the signs that we observe.
Everything else is part of this problem.
The congress, in particular, will host a round table on the problems of epigenetics – the role of non-inherited variations of the genetic text. In the process of individual development of an organism, "labels" are placed in individual cells "on top" of the genetic text (genome).
These "tags" determine in which cells which gene will work and which one will be silent. And all these processes occur against the background of the same genome. A butterfly is first an egg, then a caterpillar, a pupa, and only then a fluttering creature. At all stages of development, it has the same genome, but organs, tissues, appearance and lifestyle are different in different phases of development, because the same genes work differently in different phases of development.
Another important topic is horizontal gene transfer. There is an idea that genetic information can only be transmitted from an ancestor to descendants. However, studies show that, at least for microorganisms, it is typical to transfer part or even all of the genes from one organism to another.
– Does this apply not only to microorganisms? It's hard to imagine that mammals exchange genes.– Yes, but most of the genetic diversity on Earth belongs to microorganisms – bacteria and archaebacteria.
At the same time, it should be understood that the eukaryotic cells themselves, of which we are composed, arose as a result of the union of two heterogeneous microorganisms. These were probably arch-living bacteria, the union of which gave a eukaryotic cell. In it, the genetic material of one bacterium began to exist in the nucleus of the cell, and another bacterium with its genetic material turned into mitochondria.
"At the bottom", at the level of microorganisms, the exchange of genes is very important. The most significant changes in the genetic material occur when whole blocks are transferred, and not through the sequential accumulation of point changes in the genetic text in successive generations. This creates difficulties for microbiologists in classification. What can the concept of a species mean if, after a single interaction of cells of two unrelated microorganisms, a cell appears that has a combination of instructions (genes) and corresponding signs that none of the two "ancestral" microorganisms had?
– One of the common "horror stories" related to genetics is the danger of genetically modified organisms, GMOs. Did you yourself say about horizontal gene transfer, or is it not significant for us?– Of course, it's not significant.
There is no food without DNA. We eat about one gram of genes a day and give 10 grams to the external environment. Here you have eaten a steak, and several thousand generations of your ancestors have also tasted it. How many genes in one steak are responsible for the growth of horns? More than a thousand billion. And where are your horns? Maybe your children will?
Is it possible to transfer foreign genes into human DNA? In nature, this process occurs less often than once in a million years. However, experimentally it was possible to transfer the gene into the monkey genome so that it is now transmitted to its descendants. But this is a special procedure, not a random process.
– Did I see that the congress will be attended by humanities scientists, for example, ethnographer and historian Yuri Berezkin?- Yes.
The topic that will be discussed at the congress for the first time is the round table "Genetics – a bridge between natural sciences and humanities". Together with our colleagues in the humanities, we will find out how human migrations in the distant past can be associated with the spread and modification of cultural traits. In this case, genetics can help ethnographers reconstruct the history of the spread of elements of culture and technology.
– Society expects that in the near future geneticists will learn to predict diseases, and, possibly, to treat them by modifying the genome. How justified are these expectations?– It is important to say that even a statistically reliable relationship between a certain gene structure and the appearance of the disease does not allow us to give an unambiguous prediction for a particular individual.
It's still quite difficult. In addition, there is a problem that an individual's genetic information may become known to outsiders. Now in the West, they are trying to legislatively prevent such data from getting into insurance companies, to prevent genetic discrimination.
If we talk about genetic markers, then for us all diseases are divided into two groups. One is small and consists of rare diseases, almost 100% caused by genetic disorders. These are, in particular, color blindness, hemophilia, phenylketonuria. Such diseases account for less than 10% of all human diseases. The total proportion of patients with such diseases is less than 3%.
The remaining 90% of all diseases (and 97% of all patients) are diseases that are determined by more than one gene, "breakdowns" that are in different genes. In addition, in favorable conditions, these "breakdowns" may not manifest themselves - there must be environmental conditions that provoke the development of the disease.
However, genetic methods are much more promising for diagnosis. The disease changes the work of the cell, which means it changes the work of its genetic apparatus. Changes in the profile of the genes (expression) can be detected on a device called a biochip, and from these changes it can be understood that some kind of process, some kind of disease has begun. At the same time, diagnosis by gene expression is an almost universal method, one analysis can provide information about many diseases at once, or indicate one of many close diseases that are not distinguishable by simpler methods.
– Many expect that there will be modification methods that will allow to "repair" genetic breakdowns in the body.– Such approaches are being developed, they are called "gene therapy".
But we must remember that "breakdowns" appear in our cells all the time. A healthy cell with minor problems successfully copes by itself, and more serious "breakdowns" can kill it. It is impossible to control every single cell. But we can expect the appearance of methods of earlier diagnosis revealing the disease.
– Can genetics fundamentally postpone aging, as some gerontologists believe?"That's nonsense.
We are completely like a stagecoach, most of our systems stop working at about the same time, commensurate with the average life expectancy. A motor in excellent condition is useless if the wheels of the car have fallen off – the car is functionally dead. These are completely different things, and they do not come down to one another. The results of aging processes accumulate in many systems of the human body. There is no one reason that can be influenced so that each of the human systems works much longer than it does now.
Another thing is that genetics can find out what living conditions, what diet or what preventive measures are useful for people with certain gene variants that shorten life expectancy compared to the norm.
– Now the topic of the resurrection of extinct species is very popular in the media and among the public. They say that almost tomorrow we will be able to revive the mammoth. How justified are these expectations?– This is a problem that has not been solved, and it is unknown – in relation to animals, at least – whether it can be solved.
Let's say we can use the DNA fragments that are preserved in the remains to reproduce the full genetic text. But where are we going to insert this DNA? We will not even be able to describe, much less reconstruct, a human or animal cell from its constituent elements. And if the species is extinct, then we simply will not have information about the species-specific elements of the cell that we need to collect.
In addition, we have a deadline after which we cannot read at least some length of genetic text. So far, the oldest remains in which it was possible to read the genetic text are a little older than 30 thousand years. And in the "Jurassic Park" dinosaurs are being restored, the remains of which have lain about 2000 times for 30 thousand years…
– How can you characterize the state of Russian genetics in comparison with the Western one?– I once wrote an analytical review about genomic research in Russia and abroad and found out that when the Human Genome program was launched in the USA, Russian allocations for genomic research amounted to one third of the American ones.
And when this program ended, the difference reached 1000 times… However, the country provides a normal education, vision of scientific problems, and ways to solve them. Most of the dozen of my graduate students who have gone abroad have successfully realized themselves in a scientific career.
It is surprising that under difficult conditions for science, young people go to universities, to graduate school. At least in our institute, IOGen RAS, the competition for postgraduate studies is growing. It pleases. Already ten years ago there was a turning point: people used to want to go abroad, and now they want to stay here to work after the defense.
In order to get serious results in genetics, modern equipment is needed – because this area is very highly technologized. We have world-class works in our country, but there are not many of them
The results of biological science are still in little demand in our country. We are not yet able to use them for our own benefit, although international corporations are successfully commercializing Russian developments abroad. An example is the production of amino acids based on recombinant microorganisms. For almost 30 years, Russian developments in this field have remained the best in the world and are used in large-scale production.
By the way, these organisms created in Russia are, by definition, GMOs, so unloved in our country. Like all those microorganisms that today "make" vitamins and antibiotics in the industry. Interestingly, all vodka production is also based on the use of GMO products for the production of alcohol. It's a pity that no one is protesting about this. And they drink no less from this, and squint only for a snack. Also, however, in vain…
– Can new large-scale projects appear in genetics that are comparable to the Human Genome program?– Perhaps it will be the "Cage" project.
We don't really know how it works. After all, a cell consists of a huge number of individuals with their own specific composition and structure that perform certain functions. We don't know these details yet.
Sidney Brenner, one of the leaders of the Human Genome project, said after the completion of this project that it was necessary to deal with the cell. Because if we understand how and what works in it, then we will understand how the function and the life of the cell itself is realized. DNA is not life yet, it is an instruction for its formation and flow.
– Can we expect breakthroughs from Russian science?– A breakthrough in fundamental research cannot be predicted.
There are many scientists who do not think of life without science. A person who cannot live without it, whether in China, America, or Russia, he will always work, will always explore something, because this, and not money, is the meaning of his life.
But it is much harder to provide scientific work – equipment, reagents, information, infrastructure – in Russia. So the probability of breakthroughs in fundamental research in our country is certainly less than abroad.
But for some reason I am sure that science will not collapse in our country, no matter what. Because there were and still are people in our country who cannot live without science. For them, "thinking" about the structure of nature is the most attractive thing in life.
Let's hope that in our country there will be more favorable conditions not only for thinking, but also for the implementation of its results in fundamental research and their practical applications.
Portal "Eternal youth" http://vechnayamolodost.ru/22.06.2009