Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Students hear from textbook writer about conservation genetics

02 August 2022 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Leonie Bolleurs

Genetics lecture — Alistair Naidoo, second-year master’s student in Conservation Genetics and full-time technician in the Department of Genetics; Prof Paul Grobler, Head of the Department of Genetics; Prof Gordon Luikart; and Hannah Janse van Vuuren, third-year master’s student in Conservation Genetics.

It is an important and exciting time to be doing research in conservation genetics. This is according to Prof Gordon Luikart, Professor of Conservation Ecology and Genetics at the Flathead Lake Bio Station at the University of Montana in the United States.

Prof Luikart, whose primary research focus is the application of genetics to the conservation of natural and managed populations, recently delivered a lecture, The Expanding Role of Genetics/omics in Wildlife Research and Conservation, on the Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State (UFS). The lecture, hosted by the Department of Genetics, was attended by a group of students and lecturers in conservation and a number of related fields.

He is one of the leading scientists in the field of conservation genetics, including integration of genomics in conservation projects. He is also co-author of the textbook Conservation and the Genomics of populations – the current prescribed textbook for GENE3744.

Species threatened with extinction

In 2008, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) stated that approximately 10-20% of all vertebrate and plant species are threatened with extinction over the next few decades. In 1984, American biologist Edward O Wilson also said that it will take millions of years to correct the ongoing loss of genetics and species diversity caused by the destruction of natural habitats. “This is the folly our descendants are least likely to forgive us.”

Prof Luikart is of the opinion that genetics has enormous potential to help manage wildlife and prevent extirpation. “My research works to realise this potential and help wildlife managers conserve populations and ecosystems,” he says.

Conservation managers and biologists have understood the risks of inbreeding for more than 100 years. In his lecture, one of the aspects of genetic conservation he focused on, was the negative effects of inbreeding and how this can be reversed using genetic rescue.

With the genetic rescue study, they found that the gene flow into recently isolated populations can increase individual fitness and population growth. He proposed that conservation managers should consider genetic principles and rescue as practical and important tools.

Prof Luikart also provided a list of information that can be retrieved from molecular genetic data to help conservation managers. This includes intel on census and effective population size, gene flow and dispersal, local adaptation and selection, forensics, genetic identification and law enforcement, and disease ecology and transmission.

Non-invasive genetic monitoring

In terms of detecting gene flow, he focused on a study about non-invasive genetic monitoring that was conducted in the Yellowstone Park. Prof Luikart and a group of students collected the shed hair and faeces of the grizzly bear, obtained from trees and hair traps, which were used as a source of DNA.

They established, for instance, that inbreeding depression is more common and stronger than previously thought in natural populations. Genetic monitoring, using non-invasive methods as described, has been found to be an effective tool that conservation managers should consider for detecting inbreeding and loss of genome-wide variation.

His research on the bighorn sheep, the alpine ibex, and the black bear informed most of the findings he discussed during his lecture.

News Archive

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points

2004-07-29

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept