[104293] in Cypherpunks
RE: DNA (fwd)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jim Choate)
Wed Oct 14 21:30:56 1998
From: Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com>
To: cypherpunks@einstein.ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 20:22:47 -0500 (CDT)
Reply-To: Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com>
Forwarded message:
> From: Matthew James Gering <mgering@ecosystems.net>
> Subject: RE: DNA (fwd)
> Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1998 18:04:32 -0700
> Monozygotic [maternal] twins do have the same DNA. Hence they are
> identical.
In my earlier post I got the naming on the type of twin incorrect, it
shouldn't have been identical. I was trying to explain that aspect in the
second paragraph. My mistake.
> Clones on the otherhand and have identical nuclear DNA, but are not
> necessarily identical because some early development processes rely on
> maternal genome material and not nuclear DNA, and depending on the
> cloning process they may have different mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA).
I assume the mitochondrial differences are due to nucleus swapping,
different line of extra-nuclear heritage?
____________________________________________________________________
To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice.
Confucius
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate
Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com
www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087
-====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
--------------------------------------------------------------------
