Japan has been cloning the same mouse continuously for 20 years. In the 58th generation, biology has said “enough”

When we talk about cloning living beings, many of us may think of the famous experiment. with Dolly the sheep. But he was not the only one, since in Japan a biologist has spent the last two decades taking life to its most extreme limit, since since 2005 his team has set itself a major challenge: serially cloning mice from a single original female donor. 20 years and more than 1,000 mice later, the experiment has collided with biology. A collapse. The results of this great cloning experiment were published recently in Nature and reveal the definitive collapse of the genetic line in generation number 58. A very important finding that not only demonstrates that the continued asexual reproduction of mammals is unsustainable, but also shows us why evolution opted so strongly for sexual reproduction and the constant renewal of DNA in our species. His story. The experiment by Japanese researcher Wakayama is a milestone in reproductive biology. In 2013, the team had already managed to clone up to 25 generations, as was then published in Cell Stem Cell; yesHowever, what seemed like a theoretically infinite process began to show serious cracks from generation 25-27. As the generations progressed, birth rates began to plummet, to the point where we are now, where he points out in his latest article that the incessant accumulation of genetic mutations was a constant. Here it was seen how the animals began to have serious genetic alterations with complete losses of chromosomes with a probability three times higher than natural sexual reproduction. Its consequences. That an animal sees its genetic material altered is not harmless, because these alterations were seen to directly affect embryonic development and the placenta, making each new generation more difficult to obtain than the previous one. But the critical point came in generation 58 of the mice, where the model finally collapsed. And the culprit of this collapse was none other than these genetic alterations, which curiously did not alter the physique of the individuals, who seemed completely healthy, but the weight of the genetic damage made it impossible to continue the chain. The impressions. From the Spanish countryside, Lluís Montoliu, CSIC researcher, has qualified this “heroic” experiment, since it suggests that this test would be impossible to do in Europe due to ethical standards and animal welfare that exist. But he sees it as important, since it proves the evolutionary superiority of sexual reproduction. The other side of the coin. Big questions arise here, since if serial cloning fails due to DNA fragmentation and damage… How is biology protected when it uses sexual reproduction? Here the answer is to have a constant renewal of the interior of our cells. Paradoxically, while science shows that copying the same DNA over and over again leads to genetic disaster, new clinical studies on human fertility are revealing that, to maintain the highest quality in male genetic material, frequent renewal is key. But in addition, it also makes it clear that we are still quite far from being able to clone humans to have two identical people, because in the end it is something that can go really wrong. Images | digitale.de In Xataka | A team of experts wants to resurrect extinct bison. There are many reasons to be skeptical

The IOC has a new method to exclude trans athletes from the Olympic Games. The problem is that biology doesn’t work like that.

At the end of March, the International Olympic Committee announced undoubtedly one of the most controversial decisions in its recent history: starting with the 2028 Los Angeles Olympic Games, no transgender athlete will be able to compete in the women’s category. But beyond the social and political debate that can be generated, we must also focus on the method chosen to determine this exclusion: a simple genetic analysis where a single gene is searched. And this is something highly discussed among science. His discoverer. The gene in question, which will be analyzed in athletes who want to participate in the female category, will be SRYwhich is nothing more than the “Sex Determining Region Y”. A gene that was discovered in 1990 by molecular biologist Andrew Sinclair and who pointed out that its presence is a determining factor in male sexual development. It is, literally, the scientific father of the test that the IOC has chosen to integrate into its Olympic requirements. But the thing is that he himself is against using it for this. Your disagreement. This decision is not a big news, since if we look back, the body that governs world athletics, World Athletics, adopted this same test in September 2025 to participate in their competitions. Here is Sinclair himself He did not hesitate to publish an opinion article where he made it clear that the result is not definitive, since the only thing the analysis can say is whether the gene is present or not. Because. In this way, it must be detailed that being positive in SRY does not give us information about whether it is working to form a testicle, if it stimulates the production of testosterone or even if it expresses the necessary receptors so that testosterone can be used. Put another way: knowing that an athlete has the SRY gene does not tell you anything conclusive about her physiology, her hormonal levels or, by extension, about her supposed competitive advantages from having testosterone. The biology of sexual development is infinitely more complex than the presence or absence of a genetic marker, which will now mark the ‘everything’ before the IOC. There is more evidence. This researcher is not the only one who opposes this decision, since at the beginning of March it was published an article signed by 34 academics to respond to the decision of World Athletics. Here they pointed to the same thing: we are facing a test that reduces everything to a single gene when biology is much more complex. And biological sex is the result of a very complex interaction of human genetics, hormones, receptors, tissues… Furthermore, the IOC’s argument suggests that this test protects against competitive equity, but for academics, they point out that there is no solid scientific evidence to demonstrate that the presence of the SRY gene is directly related to having a greater sporting advantage. It’s not something new. Although we now see a big scandal in the sports world over this decision, the reality is that if we look at the newspaper archive, something similar was already being done in the 90s. 30 years ago The IOC decided to require women to verify their sex through chromosomal testing and also by determining the SRY gene. But finally the tests were withdrawn due to technical limitations, the absence of medical evidence and also because of the legal problems it could have. A Spanish case. Due to these tests, the Spanish athlete María José Martínez Patiño was disqualified in 1985 after testing positive in the chromosome test despite not having any physiological advantage over her peers. In this way, her career was practically doomed, but she was able to recover it thanks to the help of a geneticist who was able to document her case with scientific evidence that showed that it was not giving her an advantage over the rest of her competitors. The debate. If the basis for requiring genetic testing is to protect competitive fairness, we must ask what science says about the real advantages of transgender athletes. And at this point much less is known than the general population believes. One of the most important studies It was made in 2015 by a transgender researcher who analyzed the running times of eight athletes before and after their transition. In this case, the brands slowed down and their relative performance compared to runners of the same sex remained quite stable. An IOC study. Published in 2024 and partially financed by the committee itself, produced results that do not fit with the discourse we keep hearing: transgender women showed worse results than cisgender women in lower body strength and lung function. But logically it does not mean that there cannot be residual advantages in certain sports, which is something that to this day remains a question that needs an answer. And now what? We are undoubtedly facing a dispute about which tools are valid to solve a genuinely complex problem. Right now, science suggests that the SRY gene test is not the best tool, but because it does not give us a complete answer, since the SRY gene may be present and the body may not respond to testosterone. But this is something that today must continue to be investigated to obtain evidence that can guarantee this equity, but always with a scientific basis behind it. Images | Umanoid Erik van Leeuwen In Xataka | We have accepted that sport is “medicine” for the body. Now science is discovering its side effects

Tell me what bacteria live in your intestine and I will tell you who your friends are | Health and well-being

Mencius, a Chinese philosopher, wrote a handful of centuries ago that “friendship is one mind in two bodies.” Modern science could add another element: friendship is also a microbiota in two bodies. A study has found that the more people interact, the more similar the composition of the microorganisms living in their intestines becomes, even if they do not live in the same household. The investigation, recently published in the magazine Naturealso ensures that an individual’s microbiome is determined not only by their closest social contacts, but also by the connections of these contacts. That is, the friends of your friends. To know the details of this investigation you have to take a trip to the western heart of the Honduran jungle. It was in this Caribbean country where scientists from Yale University worked for ten years until they recruited a group of 1,787 adults, spread across 18 isolated villages, to donate a sample of their feces. All participants had a traditional diet and practically did not consume antibiotics or other medications. Nicholas Christakis, lead author of the study, explains that they were “very lucky that the participants were helpful and engaged.” The scientists needed to be able to trace each of the volunteers’ contacts with certainty, something that would have been much more complicated to do in cities like Madrid or Barcelona. The towns of Honduras, in this case, were perfect. More information Before continuing to advance with the results of this research, it is worth explaining what the microbiota is and why it is important. Francisco Guarner, director of the Digestive System Research Unit at the Vall d’Hebron General Hospital in Barcelona, ​​has a definition: “It is the bacteria communityviruses and fungi that colonize the digestive tract. We could think of it as another organ of the human body, a set of biological capacities that help the survival of an individual.” Although this organ It lives within us, it functions under its own rules and hierarchies. It is organized in its own way and it is not easy to manipulate it. “It is essential for the digestion of food. It provides us with many enzymes and metabolic pathways that humans do not have,” adds the expert. Thanks to the microbiota we can, for example, digest fiber. They are also essential for the development of a balanced immune system. For decades, science has explored the composition of the microbiota to understand how it is generated in each person. Mireia Vallés Colomer, director of the Microbiome Research Group at Pompeu Fabra University, details that vertical transmission had been, until now, the most likely explanation. “We receive these microorganisms, in large part, from our mothers, through childbirth and breastfeeding. We also share bacteria that our grandmother passed to our mother,” he details. However, the new study ventures that the microbiota changes throughout life, and that those largely responsible for these changes are our social contacts. A horizontal transmission. “We were very surprised by the reach of microbes that networks of people share. In fact, we can predict who your friends are based on how similar the microbes in your stool are to theirs,” says Christakis. Data suggests that people living in the same house share up to 14% of the microbial strains in their intestines. While those who do not live together, but usually spend time together, share 10%. The research has also been able to determine that individuals who live in the same town, but who do not usually interact too frequently, share only 4%. There is, the authors say, a chain of transmission because friends of friends share more strains than would be expected by mere chance. The transmission method There is a question that continues to swirl around this research and that is to understand how strains are transmitted bacteria from one microbiota to the other. “We do not have a conclusive answer about how this transmission occurs,” says Vallés. And he adds: “What is hypothesized is that what reaches the intestine has to pass through the mouth. “Many bacteria in the microbiome don’t tolerate direct contact with oxygen for very long, so close contact is needed, but we don’t know exactly what that looks like.” Guarner, however, details that “the fecal-oral route “It seems to be the most important transmission vector.” That is to say, although we clean ourselves and more or less control our hygiene, in some previous studies it has been detected that the bacteria that are typically found in the intestine also appear on the hands. This is how they then reach the mouth. Some of the bacteria manage to survive this journey from the intestine because they travel in the form of spores, similar to those of fungi. “With this transmission mechanism it does not have to be extremely direct contact, it can be through a towel or clothing,” details Guarner. There is no need to be alarmed. This transfer of microorganisms It is what, in some way, keeps us alive. So much so, that new lines of research on the relationship between microbiota and health suggest that a healthy and fit community of microorganisms has an impact on several aspects of our well-being. Some researchers are trying to establish a direct relationship between the microbiota and non-communicable diseasessuch as cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and even depression. Guarner explains: “This is still a bit speculative, but normally what happens is that these types of diseases are associated with a poor microbiome.” Vallés contributes that “it has been observed that people with the so-called ‘modern diseases’ suffer an alteration in the composition of their microbiome.” But it is not that there is a particular bacteria responsible for these diseases, but rather it is the loss of diversity in general that worsens the state of health. In this case, the research opens the door to continue analyzing whether these non-communicable diseases, in fact, do have a transmissibility factor. And if an entire community of people has a weakened microbiota, these diseases could proliferate more easily … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.