>how do you know that removing this one gene doesn't unlock consciousness?

i'm not the poster you're replying to, but for me the answer is this :

consciousness appears to me to be a constellation of traits rather than a trait itself that would be easily acquired with a genetic shift.

One could then say : 'What if the one we flip is the thing that finishes the constellation of traits that activates consciousness?' , and sadly I must confess that I believe that if that were to happen to an entity without sufficient communications methods that it would probably remain unknown and subject to whatever experiences whatever sensory organs it may have provides it, while we remain entirely unaware for some time.

Also, a point that I agree upon by the poster who replied to you with me ; we don't seem to hold conscious entities in very high regard -- only human ones.

relevant SMBC: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/intelligence-2

A strange idea but theoretically possible. Although it wasn't one of the genes targeted in this study, humans are the only animals which have the Neu4Ac form of the sialic acid sugar, instead of Neu5Ac, and the brain is one of the regions that is most heavily sialiated in humans and could be one of the things that sets us apart.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC7153325/

I mean pigs are already "conscious" on some level, I'm sure.

I'd definitely think of pigs conscious given they can play video games: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56023720

> how do you know that removing this one gene doesn't unlock consciousness?

The words you're looking for are sentience or even sapience.