-
1 of 10
-
2 of 10
-
3 of 10
-
4 of 10
-
5 of 10
-
6 of 10
-
7 of 10
-
8 of 10
-
9 of 10
-
10 of 10
Researchers at Texas A&M clone first cat
Archive
Comments
Story
AUSTIN, Texas – Texas A&M University laid claim to a unique set of bragging rights last week when a team of researchers announced the successful cloning of a household cat.
The female short-haired calico, named “CC” for copycat, was born Dec. 22 and is reportedly healthy and active. Mice, cattle, pigs and sheep, such as “Dolly,” all have been cloned, but CC is the first successfully cloned household pet. Scientists delayed the cat’s birth announcement to make sure her genetic copying was exact and to ensure she was healthy and developing normally.
“With each new species cloned, we learn more about how this technology might be applied to improving the health of animals and humans,” said Mark Westhustin, head researcher for the project, in a written statement.
Alan Lambowitz, a professor of cellular and molecular biology, said there is no cloning research underway at University of Texas-Austin.
“I think pets, like people, are unique individuals, and it’s foolish and superficial to believe they can be replaced by a clone,” said Lambowitz, a critic of pet cloning. “It sounds like it’s a nice business for Texas A&M, but it’s not one I would personally want to get into.”
Genetic Savings and Clone Inc. funded the project with a $3.7 million donation and will in return retain all technology rights; however, members of the public who want to replace their pets via the company’s services can expect a steep price.
Westhustin said pet owners seeking to bring their companions back to life need to understand fully the nature of pet cloning before making a decision.
“We’ve been very clear with people that this is a reproduction, not a resurrection,” Westhustin said.
Despite her replica set of genes, CC differs in coloration from her genetic donor, Rainbow. The color differences arise because pigmentation is a product of post-birth developmental factors and the animal’s genotype.
Will Potter, a representative for UT Students Against Cruelty to Animals, said he disagrees with the cloning research.
“The problem is we only value these animals’ lives if we can make money off them. I find it disturbing – everything from the name of the cat to the motives behind the research,” Potter said. “It brings up a lot of questions concerning the role of a university because this kind of money could have been used to solve very real problems.”
Potter also called attention to overcrowded pet adoption agencies and said pet cloning will come at the cost of animals already alive. That argument, which has been echoed by several animal rights organizations, was refuted by Westhustin.
“The whole argument is ridiculous. An occasional pet cloning is not going to compete with natural reproduction. People who clone pets are more likely to not adopt a pet if no other alternative is available,” Westhustin said.
The cat’s birth marked the team’s lone success of the 87 embryos transferred into nine surrogate cats. That success rate is reportedly on par with past cloning efforts.
Austin Kinghorn, Daily Texan (U. Texas-Austin)