This is an area I find fascinating. One thing I've pondered is with merely a genome could you construct the organism it's from?
The first problem is creating a fertilized egg. Having that, it's not clear to me (again, as a layman) whether or not you could gestate that to an independent organism.
To put it in computing terms, imagine the genome as "source code" and the host (gestating) organism as, for lack of a better word, a "compiler". Now imagine that a lot of the complexity of life comes from these successive generations, which is to say that an organism isn't simply a function of its genome, it's essentially a function of every ancestor.
If you think about it, some organisms are born with some ingrained characteristics and behaviour. Humans have the moro reflex. Bear cubs manage to find way to their mother's milk when the mother is barely conscious. Some ducks are capable of swimming, eating and surviving from the day they're born.
How much of this is part of the genome and how much is "communicated" from mother to child in the womb?
Obviously only applies to a subset of animals. Birds, for example, are born in eggs and--unless I'm missing something--the only interaction between parent and egg once the egg is laid is incubation so it's easy to imagine that there is no "communication" in this phase.
But maybe this is what makes mammals (particularly primates) seemingly special? How much of what we do is hardwired or "software"?
So there have been two important developments in the last year or so. The first is hatching chicks without a shell [1]. The second is this and this is far more impressive.
If nothing else, this limits potential interactions between mother and unborn child. At least for sheep. I think this is a really important development.
[1]: https://www.cnet.com/news/video-shows-how-to-incubate-an-egg...