Male Gene combining?

[AJLove]

Is possible to combine two male genes and join the two donors sperm with an embryo.

[andrewlittle]

Originally Posted by AJLove

Is possible to combine two male genes and join the two donors sperm with an embryo.

Unless I'm mistaken, an embryo isn't formed until after the female's egg is fertilized.
Do you mean possibly, can a sperm be manipulated somehow to include the genes of two males, and then fertilize the egg?
Or are you asking of it is possible to genetically alter an embryo with the genes of two males?

Or am I just confused as all get out?

Anyway, I found this site which had way more information on fertilization than I care to know, but may or may not interets you.

http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks...fert/fert.html

[AJLove]

Yes I wanted to know if you can include the gene of two males to fertilize the egg.

[andrewlittle]

Originally Posted by AJLove

Yes I wanted to know if you can include the gene of two males to fertilize the egg.

While the following deals with formation of an embryo from two males or two females, it may also apply to your question. It seems that abnormalities ensue from not having the purely male-female mixing in reproduction.

From http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives...3843.Ge.r.html

Simplistically, a diploid (2n) embryo can be formed by artificial joining of any two haploid (n) gamete nuclei of the same species. However, there are more variables to this equation. There is a phenomenon called parental imprinting. Imprinting is a mechanism by which some genes are preferentially silenced in males and in females. The genes that are silenced in male gametes are active in female gametes and vice-versa. Thus, dividing the genes in the embryo as “mom’s” and “dad’s”. This mechanism was first found in insects and now has been shown to happen in mammals as well, including humans. As a consequence of imprinting, the embryo needs both maternal AND paternal genomes to develop properly. For instance, consider a gene X, which is inactivated in the female gamete. An embryo consisting of a double copy of maternal genes would lack expression of gene X. Conversely, a normal embryo with a copy of X from the mother (which is inactivated), can still express X from his paternal-derived genes.

Your question, however, was addressed directly by Barton, Surani and Norris (Nature 1984 Sep 27-Oct 3; 311(5984): 374-6) who made mouse embryos that had double copy of maternal genes or of paternal genes. Neither the paternal-only nor the maternal-only embryos developed normally. The embryos that only had maternal genes were almost normal-sized, but the extraembryonic tissue tissue (structures that nourish the embryo, such as the placenta) was underdeveloped. On the other hand, the embryos that only had paternal genes were puny, but the extraembryonic were almost normal.

That being said, it is still not a definitive answer, since you are asking about first combining two sets of male genes in a single sperm - right?

This would need to occur before fertilization of the egg becasue, if I remember correctly, there is a mechanism in mammals to that causes an egg fertilized by two sperm to fail early in the development process.

[TigerXero]

Having two sperm fertilize one egg is a BIG no-no. The zygote (egg+sperm/single cell) would have too many chromosomes, hence why as soon as a sperm enters an egg, the egg cell's membrane undergoes a chemical change that prevents any other sperm from entering. If your question was about having two sperm cells fertilize an egg, then that's a problem in and of itself.

Otherwise... if you are talking about combining two XY DNA strands, then...
The only way I could think of to combine two male sperm cell's genetic information is to have some computer analyze two persons' DNA, calcluate what a joining of those two would look like, then artificially create that DNA strand, have it go through the process of meiosis, somehow put it in a sperm cell, and THEN allow it to fertilize an egg. OR, you could analyze two people's sperm cells (whose DNA have already undergone meiosis) and repeat the above process minus meiosis. Either way, both of these would require a lot of money, or some really good connections with someone in a genetics lab, but I don't even know if any of this is currently possible. It would work in theory though.

Yay~ for high school Biology II!

[scott snedeker]

genetics and family

I'm assuming your interest is in part with you and CJ having a child together. one thought is to artificially inseminate with a mixture of both semen and not doing genetic testing after so the child has equal chance of being one of yours. Then just accept him or her as both of yours.

I find that my gay family of genetically unrelated persons is more real to me for the fact that we are connected by love that is more close to being unconditional. This family that I have been involved in it's creation has made it possible for me to start forgiving trespasses of my genetic family members.

Love is what matters most, not genetics. We are all connected to one another. Love will make you aware of it. Fear will make you blind to it.

[TigerXero]

And it's like my boyfriend says, blood is only as thick as you make it.

I actually thought of something interesting. If my boyfriend and I had a child through artifical insemination, we had decided we'd use my genes, but I thought it would be awesome if people could see both of us in the child, so I thought it would be neat if we could find a surrogate mother who has around half or one fourth Inuit descent because my boyfriend is one-fourth Inuit. (You can see it in his eyes. They're more asian versus mine being European [as in sunken back into your head].) I feel weird talking about it, but I thought it was a cool idea. Of course, this is all assuming we go the IVF route versus adoption. Oh, and given that we do decide to have children in the future.