DOCSLIB.ORG

Government Proposals for the Regulation of Hybrid and Chimera Embryos

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

House of Commons Science and Technology Committee Government proposals for the regulation of hybrid and chimera embryos Fifth Report of Session 2006–07 Volume II Oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 28 March 2007 HC 272–ll Published on 5 April 2007 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £18.50 The Science and Technology Committee The Science and Technology Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Office of Science and Innovation and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mr Phil Willis MP (Liberal Democrat, Harrogate and Knaresborough)(Chairman) Adam Afriyie MP (Conservative, Windsor) Mr Robert Flello MP (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent South) Linda Gilroy MP (Labour, Plymouth Sutton) Dr Evan Harris MP (Liberal Democrat, Oxford West & Abingdon) Dr Brian Iddon MP (Labour, Bolton South East) Chris Mole MP (Labour/Co-op, Ipswich) Mr Brooks Newmark MP (Conservative, Braintree) Dr Bob Spink MP (Conservative, Castle Point) Graham Stringer MP (Labour, Manchester, Blackley) Dr Desmond Turner MP (Labour, Brighton Kemptown) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental Select Committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No.152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/s&tcom A list of Reports from the Committee in this Parliament is included at the back of this volume. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are: Dr Lynn Gardner (Clerk); Dr Celia Blacklock (Second Clerk); Dr Anne Simpson (Committee Specialist); Dr Sarah Bunn (Committee Specialist); Ana Ferreira (Committee Assistant); Robert Long (Senior Office Clerk); and Christine McGrane (Committee Secretary). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Science and Technology Committee, Committee Office, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general inquiries is: 020 7219 2793; the Committee’s e- mail address is: [email protected] Government proposals for the regulation of hybrid and chimera embryos 1 Witnesses Wednesday 31 January 2007 Dr Lyle Armstrong, Lecturer, Institute of Human Genetics, University of Newcastle- Ev 1 Upon-Tyne, Professor Chris Shaw, Professor of Neurology and Neurogenetics, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College, London, and Professor Austin Smith, Director, Wellcome Trust Centre for Stem Cell Research, University of Cambridge, Ms Shirley Harrison, Chair, Angela McNab, Chief Executive and Professor Neva Ev 10 Haites, Member, Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Monday 5 February 2007 Dr David King, Director, Human Genetics Alert, Dr Calum MacKellar, Director Ev 21 Scottish Council on Bioethics, and The Right Reverend Dr Lee Rayfield, Bishop of Swindon Mr Simon Denegri, Chief Executive, Association of Medical Research Charities, and Ev 28 Professor Raanon Gillon, Former Editor of the Journal of Bioethics Professor Colin Blakemore, Chief Executive, Medical Research Council, Professor Ev 32 Martin Bobrow, Deputy Chairman, Wellcome Trust, and Mr David Macauley, Chief Executive, UK Stem Cell Foundation Wednesday 28 February 2007 Caroline Flint MP, Minister for Public Health, Professor Sir Liam Donaldson, Chief Ev 40 Medical Officer for England and Mr Mark Bale, Deputy-Director of Scientific Development and Bioethics, Department of Health 2 Government proposals for the regulation of hybrid and chimera embryos Written evidence 1 St Mary’s University College Ev 50 2 ProLife Alliance Ev 51 3 Reverend Christopher Johnson Ev 51 4 Cystic Fibrosis Trust Ev 51 5 Mrs Marie Rodgers Ev 52 6 The Wellcome Trust/Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute of Cancer and Developmental Biology, University of Cambridge Ev 52 7 Biosciences Federation Ev 54 8 European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology Ev 55 9 Scottish Council on Human Bioethics Ev 56, 154 10 Multiple Sclerosis Society and the Alzheimer’s Society Ev 61 11 Dr. Stephen Brennan, Master of the Guild of Catholic Doctors Ev 62 12 Institute of Biology Ev 62 13 Peter McCullagh Ev 64 14 North-East England Stem Cell Institute (NESCI) Ev 66 15 Dr Robin Lovell-Badge Ev 67, 155 16 Muscular Dystrophy Campaign Ev 72 17 Mary Frances Dysko Ev 74 18 Janet Cuthie and Jenny Hepburn Ev 75 19 Alzheimer Scotland Ev 75 20 Dr Lyle Armstrong, University of Newcastle upon Tyne Ev 76 21 Christian Action Research and Education (CARE) Ev 80 22 Scottish Stem Cell Network (SSCN) Ev 84 23 Christian Medical Fellowship Ev 85 24 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists Ev 88 25 Motor Neurone Disease Association Ev 89 26 Lawyers’ Christian Fellowship Ev 90 27 Dr Neville Cobbe, University of Edinburgh Ev 90 28 Association of Medical Research Charities (AMRC) Ev 94 29 Professor Sir Martin Evans Ev 96 30 Comment on Reproductive Ethics (CORE) Ev 97 31 British Medical Association Ev 100 32 Association of Clinical Embryologists Ev 101 33 Cancer Research UK Ev 101 34 The United Kingdom National Stem Cell Network (UKNSCN) Ev 102 35 Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust Ev 105 36 Bioindustry Association Ev 107 37 Department of Health Ev 110, 167 38 Dr Elizabeth Allan Ev 114 39 Genetic Interest Group Ev 118 40 Linacre Centre for HealthCare Ethics Ev 119 41 The Academy of Medical Sciences Ev 121 42 Parkinson’s Disease Society of the United Kingdom Ev 121 Government proposals for the regulation of hybrid and chimera embryos 3 43 Cameron McLarty Ev 124 44 Centre for Regenerative Medicine, the Queen’s Medical Research Institute, University of Edinburgh Ev 124, 162 45 Royal Society Ev 125 46 Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority (HFEA) Ev 126, 158 47 Professor Thomas Baldwin, Department of Philosophy, University of York Ev 128 48 Dr Jus St. John, Lecturer in Mitochondrial and Reproductive Genetics, Medical School, University of Birmingham Ev 128, 164 49 Dr Stephen Minger, Director, Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, Wolfson Centre for Age-Related Disease, King’s College, London Ev 129, 165, 166 50 Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) Ev 131 51 Human Genetics Alert Ev 132 52 Professor Sir Liam Donaldson, Chief Medical Officer of England Ev 137 53 Church of Scotland, and the Church and Society Council Ev 140 54 Brethren Christian Fellowship (The Brethren) Ev 144 55 Department of Trade and Industry Ev 145 56 Professor Hui Z. Sheng Ev 147 57 The Rt Reverend Dr Lee Rayfield, Bishop of Swindon Ev 148 58 National Institute for Biological Standards & Control Ev 149 59 Responses to Letter from the Committee to experts in embryo research Ev 150 Alison Murdoch, Institute of Human Genetics, Newcastle University Ev 150 Professor David H Barlow, University of Glasgow Ev 150 Professor Jose B. Cibelli, Michigan State University Ev 150, 151 Professor Peter Braude, Kings College London Ev 151 Professor Alan Trounson, Monash Institute of Reproduction and Development Ev 151 Professor Lorraine Young, Wolfson Centre for Stem Cells, Tissue Engineering and Modelling Ev 152 Professor Richard Gardner, University of Oxford Ev 152 Dr Daniel Brison, St Mary’s Hospital Ev 153 Maureen Wood – University of Aberdeen Ev 153 Dr Luca Gianaroli, Societá Italiana Studi di Medicina della Riproduzione Ev 153 60 Chief Rabbi, Sir Jonathan Sacks Ev 158 4 Government proposals for the regulation of hybrid and chimera embryos Reports from the Science and Technology Committee in the 2005 Parliament Session 2006–07 First Report Work of the Committee in 2005-06 HC 202 Second Report Human Enhancement Technologies in Sport HC 67 Third Report The Cooksey Review HC 204 Fourth Report Research Council Institutes HC 68–l Fifth Report Government proposals for the regulation of hybrid and HC 272–l chimera embryos Sixth Report Office of Science and Innovation: Scrutiny Report 2005 and HC 203 2006 First Special Report Scientific Advice, Risk and Evidence Based Policy Making: HC 307 Government Response to the Committee’s Seventh Report of Session 2005-06 Session 2005–06 First Report Meeting UK Energy and Climate Needs: The Role of Carbon HC 578-I Capture and Storage Second Report Strategic Science Provision in English Universities: A Follow– HC 1011 up Third Report Research Council Support for Knowledge Transfer HC 995-I Fourth Report Watching the Directives: Scientific Advice on the EU Physical HC 1030 Agents (Electromagnetic Fields) Directive Fifth Report Drug classification: making a hash of it? HC 1031 Sixth Report Identity Card Technologies: Scientific Advice, Risk and HC 1032 Evidence Seventh Report Scientific Advice, Risk and Evidence Based Policy Making HC 900–I First Special Report Forensic Science on Trial: Government Response to the HC 427 Committee’s Seventh Report of Session 2004-05 Second Special Strategic Science Provision in English Universities: HC 428 Report Government Response to the Committee’s Eighth Report of Session 2004-05 Third Special Report Meeting UK Energy and Climate Needs: The Role of Carbon HC 1036 Capture and Storage: Government Response to the Committee’s First Report of Session 2005-06 Fourth Special Strategic Science Provision in English Universities: A Follow– HC 1382 Report up: Government Response to the Committee’s Second Report of Session 2005-06 Fifth Special Report Research Council Support for Knowledge Transfer: HC 1653 Government Response to the
Recommended publications
  • The Ethical Consistency of Animal Equality

    The Ethical Consistency of Animal Equality

    1 The ethical consistency of animal equality Stijn Bruers, Sept 2013, DRAFT 2 Contents 0. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 5 0.1 SUMMARY: TOWARDS A COHERENT THEORY OF ANIMAL EQUALITY ........................................................................ 9 1. PART ONE: ETHICAL CONSISTENCY ......................................................................................................... 18 1.1 THE BASIC ELEMENTS ................................................................................................................................. 18 a) The input data: moral intuitions .......................................................................................................... 18 b) The method: rule universalism............................................................................................................. 20 1.2 THE GOAL: CONSISTENCY AND COHERENCE ..................................................................................................... 27 1.3 THE PROBLEM: MORAL ILLUSIONS ................................................................................................................ 30 a) Optical illusions .................................................................................................................................... 30 b) Moral illusions ....................................................................................................................................
  • Chimpanzee Rights: the Philosophers' Brief

    Chimpanzee Rights: the Philosophers' Brief

    Chimpanzee Rights: The Philosophers’ Brief By Kristin Andrews Gary Comstock G.K.D. Crozier Sue Donaldson Andrew Fenton Tyler M. John L. Syd M Johnson Robert C. Jones Will Kymlicka Letitia Meynell Nathan Nobis David M. Peña-Guzmán Jeff Sebo 1 For Kiko and Tommy 2 Contents Acknowledgments…4 Preface Chapter 1 Introduction: Chimpanzees, Rights, and Conceptions of Personhood….5 Chapter 2 The Species Membership Conception………17 Chapter 3 The Social Contract Conception……….48 Chapter 4 The Community Membership Conception……….69 Chapter 5 The Capacities Conception……….85 Chapter 6 Conclusions……….115 Index 3 Acknowledgements The authors thank the many people who have helped us throughout the development of this book. James Rocha, Bernard Rollin, Adam Shriver, and Rebecca Walker were fellow travelers with us on the amicus brief, but were unable to follow us to the book. Research assistants Andrew Lopez and Caroline Vardigans provided invaluable support and assistance at crucial moments. We have also benefited from discussion with audiences at the Stanford Law School and Dalhousie Philosophy Department Colloquium, where the amicus brief was presented, and from the advice of wise colleagues, including Charlotte Blattner, Matthew Herder, Syl Ko, Tim Krahn, and Gordon McOuat. Lauren Choplin, Kevin Schneider, and Steven Wise patiently helped us navigate the legal landscape as we worked on the brief, related media articles, and the book, and they continue to fight for freedom for Kiko and Tommy, and many other nonhuman animals. 4 1 Introduction: Chimpanzees, Rights, and Conceptions of Personhood In December 2013, the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) filed a petition for a common law writ of habeas corpus in the New York State Supreme Court on behalf of Tommy, a chimpanzee living alone in a cage in a shed in rural New York (Barlow, 2017).
  • Trial on Personhood for Chimp Iihias111

    Trial on Personhood for Chimp Iihias111

    ~ ~~ -~------------- Trial on personhood for chimp IIHias111 Martin Balluch 1 und Eberhart Theuer' [Verein Gegen Tierfabriken, Vienna, Austria, 2University of Vienna, Austria Summary Zusammenfassung: Gerichtsverfahren zur Erlangung des Perso- In 1982, the chimp "Hiasl" was abducted from the Western nenrechts für den Schimpansen Hiasl African jungle to be used in scientific experiments in Austria. Der Schimpanse "Hiasl" wurde 1982 aus dem Dschungel West- Since his abduction was illegal, he was freed at the airport. Af- afrikas nach Österreich entführt, um hier zu Tierversuchen ver- ter long legal battles with the company responsible for his ab- wendet zu werden. Da es sich um einen illegalen Transport han- duction, he grew up in a humanfamily and now lives at a Vien- delte, wurde er am Flughafen von Zollbeamten befreit. Nach nese anima I shelter. In 2006, this shelter ran into financial langem Rechtsstreit wuchs Hiasl in einer menschlichen Familie difficulties and "Hiasl" was threatened with deportation. und dem Wiener Tierschutzhaus auf Durch finanzielle Schwie- Therefore in 2007, his close [riends started legal procedures to rigkeiten des Tierschutzhauses Ende 2006 war er plötzlich mit have him declared a person and to have a legal guardian ap- Abschiebung ins Ausland bedroht. Deshalb begannen seine pointed for him to represent him in court. Foul' renowned ex- Freunde einen Sachwaltschaftsprozess am Bezirksgericht Möd- perts in anthropology, biology and law supported the case sei- fing für seine Anerkennung als Person. Vier anerkannte Exper- entifically. According to Austrian civil law, all members of the tinnen in Anthropologie, Biologie und Rechtswissenschaften genus "Homo" are persons. Sharing 99.4% of human genes, unterstützten diesen Antrag wissenschaftlich.
  • An Initial Population Structure and Genetic Diversity Analysis For

    An Initial Population Structure and Genetic Diversity Analysis For

    Aquatic Mammals 2017, 43(5), 507-516, DOI 10.1578/AM.43.5.2017.507 An Initial Population Structure and Genetic Diversity Analysis for Stenella clymene (Gray, 1850): Evidence of Differentiation Between the North and South Atlantic Ocean Luana Nara,1 Ana Carolina Oliveira de Meirelles,2 Luciano Raimundo Alardo Souto,3 Jose Martíns Silva-Jr,4 and Ana Paula Cazerta Farro1 1Laboratório de Genética e Conservação Animal, Departamento de Ciências Agrárias e Biológicas, CEUNES, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Rodovia BR 101 Norte, Km 60, Bairro Litoranêo, 29932-540 São Mateus, ES, Brazil E-mail: [email protected] 2AQUASIS – Associação de Pesquisa e Preservação de Ecossistemas Aquáticos, Praia de Iparana, s/nº, SESC Iparana, 61600-000 Caucaia, CE, Brazil 3V.I.V.A. – Viver, Informar e Valorizar o Ambiente, Avenida Antônio Carlos Magalhães, nº 1034, Edifício Pituba Park Center, sala 251-A, Itaigara, 41825-000 Salvador, BA, Brasil 4NGI-FN/ICMBio – Rua Eurico Cavalcanti, s/nº, Vila do Boldró, Caixa Postal nº 50, 53900-000 Fernando de Noronha, PE, Brazil Abstract Introduction Information concerning population structure and Stenella clymene, the Clymene dolphin, has a genetic diversity in Stenella clymene is still scarce. restricted distribution near the equator in the Previous studies raised questions regarding the Atlantic Ocean (Jefferson & Curry, 2003). species’ position in the genus Stenella and sug- Considered an oceanic species, it is commonly gested that S. clymene might be of hybrid origin. found in deep waters (1,000 to 4,500 m), with The present study analyzed the mitochondrial cyclonic or confluent circulation (Davis et al., control region (D-loop), cytochrome oxidase I 1998; Weir, 2006), feeding typically on mesope- (CoI), and cytochrome b (Cyt b) of northeast- lagic fishes (Jefferson & Curry, 2003).
  • Husbandry Guidelines for African Lion Panthera Leo Class

    Husbandry Guidelines for African Lion Panthera Leo Class

    Husbandry Guidelines For (Johns 2006) African Lion Panthera leo Class: Mammalia Felidae Compiler: Annemarie Hillermann Date of Preparation: December 2009 Western Sydney Institute of TAFE, Richmond Course Name: Certificate III Captive Animals Course Number: RUV 30204 Lecturer: Graeme Phipps, Jacki Salkeld, Brad Walker DISCLAIMER The information within this document has been compiled by Annemarie Hillermann from general knowledge and referenced sources. This document is strictly for informational purposes only. The information within this document may be amended or changed at any time by the author. The information has been reviewed by professionals within the industry, however, the author will not be held accountable for any misconstrued information within the document. 2 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS Wildlife facilities must adhere to and abide by the policies and procedures of Occupational Health and Safety legislation. A safe and healthy environment must be provided for the animals, visitors and employees at all times within the workplace. All employees must ensure to maintain and be committed to these regulations of OHS within their workplace. All lions are a DANGEROUS/ HIGH RISK and have the potential of fatally injuring a person. Precautions must be followed when working with lions. Consider reducing any potential risks or hazards, including; Exhibit design considerations – e.g. Ergonomics, Chemical, Physical and Mechanical, Behavioural, Psychological, Communications, Radiation, and Biological requirements. EAPA Standards must be followed for exhibit design. Barrier considerations – e.g. Mesh used for roofing area, moats, brick or masonry, Solid/strong metal caging, gates with locking systems, air-locks, double barriers, electric fencing, feeding dispensers/drop slots and ensuring a den area is incorporated.
  • Route 1, Hampton NH • 603.926.8733 • Tile • Tile Stone Floors • • Wood Carpet • Stone Fabrication Eno’S Designing & a 40A | Age P

    Route 1, Hampton NH • 603.926.8733 • Tile • Tile Stone Floors • • Wood Carpet • Stone Fabrication Eno’S Designing & a 40A | Age P

    HAPPY HOLIDAYS! Inside: Seacoast Holidays ALSO INSIDE: 16 VOICES 26,000 COPIES Please Deliver Before FRIDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2006 Vol. 32 | No. 49 | 3 Sections |40 Pages In tune with the School concerts hit a holiday season high note for students Cyan Magenta Yellow Black BY SCOTT E. KINNEY ble treated those in atten- EDITOR, 16 VOICes dance to “Holiday Magic,” a EXETER | The gymna- collection of three Christmas sium of the Lincoln Street tunes and “Jingle March,” Royal Caribbean is currently promoting January and February sailings. School was packed to capac- written by string ensemble Below is a sample of many itineraries being offered at promotional rates. ity on Tuesday night, as the director Nancy McGehee. Prices are cruise only!!! school’s fifth graders treated Not to be outdone the 15-Jan-2007 4 Nt. Bahamas Cruise Sovereign of the Seas their audience to a holiday school’s chorus performed its Inside $244.00 Ocean-view $259.00 WE SPECIALIZE IN SERVICE OF musical extravaganza. version of “Once on a House- 11-Jan-2007 4 Nt. West Caribbean Cruise Enchantment of the Seas The event began with the top,” an international holiday Inside $279.00 Ocean-view $399.00 fifth grade band perform- musical that lends itself to VOLVOS, JAGUARS 04-Feb-2007 6 Nt. Western Caribbean Cruise Jewel of the Seas ing holiday favorites “Sleigh any holiday this time of year, Inside $499.00 Ocean-view $599.00 Ride” and “The Little Drum- regardless of denomination. & HONDAS mer Boy,” along with “We If those in attendance 04-Feb-2007 7 Nt.
  • Opposition to Chimera Research and the Scope of Federal Regulation

    Opposition to Chimera Research and the Scope of Federal Regulation

    Mice, Men, and Monsters: Opposition to Chimera Research and the Scope of Federal Regulation Tia Sherringhamt INTRODUCTION In Western traditions, part-human, part-animal entities-sirens, Minotaurs, and Gorgons-have been perceived as threats to humanity. These amorphous creatures are often portrayed as luring humans into the underworld, bridging the gap between human civilization and the animal kingdom, and acting as intermediaries between this world and the next. Interspecies creatures, which transgress traditional boundaries between the human and animal realms, continue to challenge contemporary Western society, particularly in the wake of biotechnology capable of introducing entities possessing human and animal tissues. When President George W. Bush delivered the State of the Union address on January 31, 2006, he called upon Congress "to pass legislation to prohibit the most egregious abuses of medical research . [which include] creating human-animal hybrids." 2 President Bush found the topic of national importance, warning the American public that human-animal chimera research threatens to devalue the Creator's gift of human life.3 In recent years, stem cell science4 has begged society to consider where to Copyright © 2008 California Law Review, Inc. California Law Review, Inc. (CLR) is a California nonprofit corporation. CLR and the authors are solely responsible for the content of their publications. t J.D. School of Law, UC Berkeley School of Law, 2008; B.A., Columbia University (Columbia College), 2004. I thank Professor R. Alta Charo for suggesting the topic and for inspiring me to write about this important area of the law. I am indebted to the California Law Review members who have worked on this Comment, and in particular, the Notes & Comments Department for their meaningful edits to this publication.
  • Born Free and Equal? on the Ethical Consistency of Animal Equality

    Born Free and Equal? on the Ethical Consistency of Animal Equality

    Born free and equal? On the ethical consistency of animal equality Stijn Bruers Proefschrift voorgelegd tot het bekomen van de graad van Doctor in de Moraalwetenschappen Promotor: Prof. dr. Johan Braeckman Promotor Prof. dr. Johan Braeckman Vakgroep Wijsbegeerte en Moraalwetenschap Decaan Prof. dr. Marc Boone Rector Prof. dr. Anne De Paepe Nederlandse vertaling: Vrij en gelijk geboren? Over ethische consistentie en dierenrechten Faculteit Letteren & Wijsbegeerte Stijn Bruers Born free and equal? On the ethical consistency of animal equality Proefschrift voorgelegd tot het behalen van de graad van Doctor in de moraalwetenschappen 2014 Acknowledgements First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor Prof. Dr. Johan Braeckman. He allowed me to explore many new paths in ethics and philosophy and he took time to guide me through the research. His assistance and advice were precious. Second, I owe gratitude to Prof. Dr. Tom Claes and Tim De Smet for comments and Dianne Scatrine and Scott Bell for proofreading. Thanks to Gitte for helping me with the lay-out and cover. Thanks to the University of Ghent for giving opportunities, knowledge and assistance. From all philosophers I know, perhaps Floris van den Berg has ethical ideas closest to mine. I enjoyed our collaboration and meetings with him. Also the many discussions with animal rights activists of Bite Back, with the participants at the International Animal Rights Conferences and Gatherings and with the many meat eaters I encountered during the years allowed me to refine my theories. Furthermore, I am grateful to anonymous reviewers for some useful comments on my research papers.
  • AZA Animal Care Manual

    AZA Animal Care Manual

    LION (Panthera leo) CARE MANUAL CREATED BY THE AZA LION SPECIES SURVIVAL PLAN® IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE Association of Zoos and Aquariums 1 AZA FELID TAXON ADVISORY GROUP Lion (Panthera leo) Care Manual Lion (Panthera leo) Care Manual Published by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums in association with the AZA Animal Welfare Committee Formal Citation: AZA Lion Species Survival Plan (2012). Lion Care Manual. Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Silver Spring, MD. p. 143. Authors and Significant contributors: Hollie Colahan, Editor, Denver Zoo, AZA Lion SSP Coordinator Cheri Asa, Ph.D, St. Louis Zoo Christy Azzarello-Dole, Brookfield Zoo Sally Boutelle, St. Louis Zoo Mike Briggs, DVM, APCRO, AZA Lion SSP Veterinary Advisor Kelly Cox, Knoxville Zoo Liz Kellerman, Abilene Zoo Suzan Murray, DVM, Smithsonian’s National Zoo, AZA Lion SSP Veterinary Advisor Lisa New, Knoxville Zoo Budhan Pukazhenthi, Ph.D, Smithsonian’s National Zoo, AZA Lion SSP Reproductive Advisor Sarah Putman, Smithsonian’s National Zoo Kibby Treiber, Fort Worth Zoo, AZA Lion SSP Nutrition Advisor Ann Ward, Ph.D, Fort Worth Zoo, AZA Lion SSP Nutrition Advisor Contributors to earlier Husbandry Manual and Standardized Guidelines drafts: Dominic Calderisi, Lincoln Park Zoo Brent Day, Little Rock Zoo Pat Thomas, Ph.D, Bronx Zoo Tarren Wagener, Fort Worth Zoo Megan Wilson, Ph.D, Zoo Atlanta Reviewers: Christy Azzarello-Dole, Brookfield Zoo Joe Christman, Disney’s Animal Kingdom, SSP Management Group Karen Dunn, Tulsa Zoo, SSP Management Group Norah Fletchall, Indianapolis Zoo,
  • Chimeric Brains Consisted of Primatologists and Other Scientists, Ethicists, and Lawyers

    Chimeric Brains Consisted of Primatologists and Other Scientists, Ethicists, and Lawyers

    Chimeras Definition Ethical Issues Links Suggested Reading End Notes Definition: What are Chimeras? How and why are they produced? Chimeras are animals composed of cells that originate from two (or more) different species. In the research lab, chimeras are created by introducing cells from one species into the developing embryo or fetus of another. (The name chimera comes from Greek mythology and describes a creature with the head of a lion, the body of a goat, and the tail of a serpent). The first chimeras helped scientists understand questions about developmental biology. A sheep-goat chimera, created in 1984, had the head of a goat and the woolly coat of a sheep.i Chicken-quail chimeras have also been successfully developed.ii,iii Sheep-Goat Chimera Courtesy of Dr. Gary B. Anderson -University of California, Davis Now, researchers are developing human-animal chimeras to study disease processes, test new drugs, and develop organs for future transplant patients. The chimeras are produced by introducing human stem cells into developing animal embryos. The following are some of the major projects utilizing human- animal chimeras underway in the U.S and internationally: Sheep-to-humans organ transplant project: At the University of Nevada at Reno, researchers have added human stem cells to sheep fetuses to create chimeras that they hope will someday serve as a reliable source of organs for liver transplant patients. Some sheep now have livers with up to 80% human cells that produce the compounds normally made by human livers. (The cells are not all in distinct liver lobes but spread throughout the tissue.
  • A Mashup World

    A Mashup World

    A Mashup World A Mashup World: Hybrids, Crossovers and Post-Reality By Irina Perianova A Mashup World: Hybrids, Cross-Overs and Post-Reality By Irina Perianova This book first published 2019 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2019 by Irina Perianova All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-5275-2134-6 ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-2134-6 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Images ............................................................................................. ix Acknowledgements .................................................................................... xi Prologue .................................................................................................... xiii Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 Chapter One ............................................................................................... 13 Lifestyle, Science: Hybrids – Interchange 1. Introduction ...................................................................................... 13 2. Definitions ......................................................................................
  • Eulen-Hybride (Strigiformes), Unerwünscht Im Artenschutz - Doch Aufschlussreich Für Taxonomische Vergleiche 108-121 108 Ornithol

    Eulen-Hybride (Strigiformes), Unerwünscht Im Artenschutz - Doch Aufschlussreich Für Taxonomische Vergleiche 108-121 108 Ornithol

    ZOBODAT - www.zobodat.at Zoologisch-Botanische Datenbank/Zoological-Botanical Database Digitale Literatur/Digital Literature Zeitschrift/Journal: Ornithologischer Anzeiger Jahr/Year: 2017 Band/Volume: 55_2-3 Autor(en)/Author(s): Scherzinger Wolfgang Artikel/Article: Eulen-Hybride (Strigiformes), unerwünscht im Artenschutz - doch aufschlussreich für taxonomische Vergleiche 108-121 108 Ornithol. Anz., 55, 2017 Ornithol. Anz., 55: 108–121 Eulen-Hybride (Strigiformes), unerwünscht im Artenschutz – doch aufschlussreich für taxonomische Vergleiche Wolfgang Scherzinger Owl-hybrids (Strigiformes), undesirable in conservation – but revealing for taxonomic comparisons All species within the order Strigiformes can be traced back to a common ancestor (monophyly). Although placed into 2 families and 5 subfamilies, this relatively high degree of kinship may ease hybridization by pairing of parents of dissimilar species. Up to now about 28 such crossings are con- firmed, mainly of owls within the same genus, exceptionally of owls from different tribes. In contrast to directed hybridization of hunting-falcons, owl-hybrids are produced rather acciden- tally, mostly by hand-reared and imprinted birds in captivity, which have no adequate knowledge of con-specific partners. Under field-conditions hybridization may occur along overlapping areas of neighbouring populations. Due to serious changes of habitat quality by human impacts, owl species, previously segregated completely, can come into contact and produce hybrids. Such incidents may endanger small relict-populations, as was the case in the prominent instance of genetic mixing of Spotted Owls Strix occidentalis and Barred Owls Strix varia in the rainforests of northern America. Knowledge of parental owls and their hybrids may help the identification of hybrids in the field by their characters and genetic structure.