The Gene Controlling Marijuana Psychoactivity

[Avery L. Breath]

http://www.jbc.org/cgi/content/full/279/38/39767

"Moreover, we attempted the expression of the active THCA synthase in tobacco hairy roots. Interestingly, the transformed tobacco hairy roots produced THCA on exogenous addition of the biosynthetic precursor CBGA. We also describe the development of THCA-producing tobacco. "

[brown]

that's cool! also, i love the fact that anyone with the equipment and knowledge AND MONEY can purchase these gene sequences and mess around with them*. but i guess at the end of the day it's a bit of a double edged sword (bio-weapons etc.). one thing that confuses me is why they decided to use TOBACCO. i  kind of skimmed thru the report (even tho lanugage like this tends to make my brain bleed) and didn't find any actual reason for it. maybe i missed it? is tobacco easier to fudge around with in the laboratory than other plants/animals? anyway, i would think that this could have been accomplished better in a plant species closer to the actual cannabis plant but at the end of the day  i guess it doesn't realy matter what plant you're using (or animal for that matter) being that you're "injecting" DNA sequences. Also am i correct in thinking that GenBankTM owns the copyright for this sequence?

*interesting links

(fluff) http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.0 ... html?pg=18

(meat and potatoes) http://www.dnahack.com/index.html

(disturbing but fascinating scare-clusion which in hindsight has nothing to do with the OP's linked article but is a good read anyway ) http://paulboutin.weblogger.com/stories ... eader$1439

I wonder how many amateur geneticists are out there doing this stuff (the non-lethal variety) at home. [tangent]Techinacly speaking, IMO,  biochem reactions could become antiquated  once the lab is turned into vats of genome enhanced  bacteria churning out pure-as-can-be endproducts. [/tangent]

[visionarybear]

using a different genus entirely will give stronge rlinks to the direct involvement of the gene would be my line of thinking. also is shows it isnt as likely an upstream change for a down stream result.

i dont think they could patent the sequence unless they modified themselves...it would be like patenting a new species of insect you found in the amazon..maybe im wrong..america has some strange ways bout some of these things...

somehow i dont think this will lead t a cannabis revolution...esp wen the traditional grows like, well, a weed...