Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
DOI 10.1007/s11692-007-9001-8
Received: 15 January 2007 / Accepted: 9 March 2007 / Published online: 12 July 2007
Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007
Introduction
The biggest challenge to biology and to science is not to
achieve deeper understanding of genomes or ecosystems or
black holes .... The challenge that matters now is to make
sure that science is taken seriously (Futuyma, 2007). The
problem that this biologist is alluding to is that while the
C. S. Rose (&)
Department of Biology, James Madison University,
Harrisonburg, VA 22807, USA
e-mail: rosecs@jmu.edu
123
50
factors that recognize and bind to sequences in the regulatory regions of specific genes to turn them on or off. The
other type makes signaling proteins that are secreted by
cells and bind to other cells to cause them to change their
gene expression.
123
51
(1978) deserves scientists praise for presenting an interview with a polite, friendly, tea-sipping scientist (i.e.,
everything that most movie scientists are not), and a film
clip, both of which explain in simple terms SCNT as it was
practiced in 1978. The explanation educates the viewer and
confirms the protagonists suspicions about an old archenemy (Dr. Josef Mengele) who is plotting to clone Hitlers
in yet another stab at world domination. Viewing the movie
now raises questions about how SCNT was modified to
make it work for Dolly, why it works on some mammal
species but not others, and what exactly goes right in the
low percentage of successful clones.
Jurassic Park (1993) presents a more ambitious scheme
to resurrect extinct species by reconstructing their DNA
from disintegrated chromosomes and using SCNT to place
those chromosomes into artificial eggs. The overwhelming
amounts of scientific effort, knowledge, guesswork, and
blind luck required to make this project work are explored
in an excellent book by DeSalle and Lindley (1997). The
films relevance to this discussion lies in its message that
DNA is all one needs to build an organism.
Many scientists refer to DNA as a blueprint or recipe
for life. Some including a Nobel laureate (quoted in Lewontin, 2000) also claim that knowing the complete DNA
sequence of an organism is enough to be able to compute the organism. However appealing, this idea is
fundamentally flawed. While DNA represents a huge store
of information for making the RNA and proteins needed
to carry out most of a cells activities, few if any of these
molecules can be made and activated in the appropriate
time and place in the organism strictly on the basis of the
sequences of their genes. The assembly, localizing, activating and degrading of most molecules in cells are
controlled by numerous chemical and physical factors that
are themselves regulated by other factors and this applies
to all cells in all organisms and at all stages of life. To
speak of DNA as controlling how embryos develop or
how adults regulate bodily functions is like saying that
one bank controls the world economy. DNA and banks
are admittedly big pools of an essential ingredient
(information and currency), but it is a higher order network of interactions that ultimately controls the fate of
both organisms and economies.
To return to Jurassic Park, the assembled chromosomes
would have to be placed into an egg with the appropriate
chemical and physical factors to activate the dinosaurs
developmental genes. Since scientists do not have intact
dinosaur eggs, it would be a total fluke to simulate this step
with a bird or artificial egg. For example, bird development
requires that the egg be rotated while in the hens uterus to
create the future head-to-tail axis of the embryo; dinosaur
development could involve a similar mechanism or something entirely different.
123
52
123
Summary
Movies will probably never meet the standards for accuracy and plausibility demanded by professional scientists,
nor will they serve as reliable teachers of fundamental
knowledge. However, that does not mean that science
educators should despair at the inaccuracies, hyperbole and
plain silliness that movies routinely serve to the general
public. Whether intentional or coincidental, the kinds of
connections between movie and real world science discussed above present opportunities for teaching important
ideas such as how genes control animal development and
evolution, how cloning works, whether DNA is sufficient
to create life, and how much genes matter in determining
human behavior. Some movies also go beyond the usual
storyline of science going wrong and threatening humans
to explore bioethical issues such as whether reproductive
practices should be under institutional control, and how to
prevent discrimination based on genetic makeup. In closing, movies are useful in pedagogy to the extent that they
inspire teachers to draw connections with exciting real
world science, and motivate students to think and talk
about scientific phenomena and their impacts on society.
Glossary
Chimeraa mythological beast comprised of the body
parts of different species, also an animal produced by
combining the embryonic cells of different species.
Eugenicsthe social policy of trying to improve the
quality of the human race by selective breeding.
Genetic determinismthe belief that all aspects of
human behavior, personality and physical makeup are
controlled exclusively by ones genes.
Genetic predispositionhaving genes that make an
individual more likely to express a certain condition.
53
References
Crichton, M. (1999). Ritual abuse, hot air and missed opportunities.
Science, 283, 14614163
DeSalle, R., & Lindley, D. (1997). The science of Jurassic Park and
The Lost World or how to build a dinosaur. New York: Basic
Books
Fehilly, C. B., Willadsen, S. M., & Tucker, E. M. (1984). Interspecific
chimaerism between sheep and goat. Nature, 307, 634636
Futuyma, D. J. (2007). Sciences greatest challenge. Bioscience, 57, 3
Halder, G., Callaerts, P., & Gehring, W. J. (1995). Induction of
ectopic eyes by targeted expression of the eyeless gene in
Drosophila. Science, 267, 17881792
International HapMap Consortium (2003). The international hapmap
project. Nature, 426, 789796
Jimenez-Sanchez, G., Childs, B., & Valle, D. (2001). Human disease
genes. Nature, 409, 853855
Kass, L. (1997). The wisdom of repugnance: Why we should ban the
cloning of human beings. The New Republic, 216(22), 1726
123
54
Kimberly, M. (2002). Reevaluating repugnance: A critical analysis of
Leon Kass writings on genetic reproductive technologies.
Princeton Journal of Bioethics, 5, 824
Kirby, D. A. (2003). Scientists on the set: Science consultants and the
communication of science in visual fiction. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 261278
Lewontin, R. (2000). The triple helix, gene, organism and environment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
Meinecke-Tilmann, S., & Meinecke, B. (1984). Experimental
chimaeras removal of reproductive barrier between sheep
and goat. Nature, 307, 637638
123