But I also posted this in Message 28:
Not so much, more like
Message 81.
So what do you make of that last sentenece (the one I've bolded)?
Given that I
did respond to that section in the very post you were replying to I'm not sure what further comment you expect me to make.
What I said about that last sentence, and the rest of your excerpt, was...
WK writes:
That it agrees entirely with what I said, that the Mariner elements are a family within the larger class of transposons/jumping genes and not a suitable generic term for all jumping genes. What I would say is sloppily worded is the first sentence which make it ambiguous whether it is 'transposable elements' or 'Mariner transposable elements' which are popularly known as jumping genes.
Why on Earth would I disagree with a simple statement of fact? What I might disagree with is the idea that the mariner elements are present in all those species as a direct result of horizontal genetic transfer. In many instances these may represents historical insertions in a common ancestral population for a number of species which may have subsequently multiplied within these lineages, much as the
Alu sequences have in primates (
Zietkiewicz et al., 1998).
TTFN,
WK
Edited by Wounded King, : No reason given.
Edited by Wounded King, : Formatting of reference and quotes.
Edited by Wounded King, : Tidied up grammar, a bit.
™ Version 4.2