Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,423 Year: 3,680/9,624 Month: 551/974 Week: 164/276 Day: 4/34 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Increases in Genetic Information
Meddle
Member (Idle past 1292 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


(3)
Message 18 of 193 (697476)
04-25-2013 10:40 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by jbozz21
04-25-2013 6:06 PM


yes but the amoeba, doesn't have nearly as many genes that code for proteins as the human genome, which means that these extra base pairs are probably telomeres which don't code for anything, exons or dna that is involved in directing translation and transcription or something else.
"The analysis shows that N. gruberi has 15,727 genes that code for proteins, compared to about 23,000 in humans."
Read more at: http://phys.org/news189181779.html#jCp
What I had specified was that these base pairs must be actual genes that code for proteins that benefit the cell.
So what you are saying is that we are approximately 50% more complicated than an amoeba? What does that say about the water flea Daphnia pulex which has 31,000 genes?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by jbozz21, posted 04-25-2013 6:06 PM jbozz21 has not replied

  
Meddle
Member (Idle past 1292 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


(2)
Message 192 of 193 (698834)
05-09-2013 9:14 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by jbozz21
05-07-2013 12:08 AM


This is not helping your assertion that man evolved from a lesser species. That is not an improvement.
Plus a vitamin C producing gene DESTROYING mutation is not beneficial mutation that is selected for against those that don't have the mutation. If anything those without the vitamin c mutation are more fit than those without it. For many people you cannot get too much vitamin c and if you do you just pee it out. But in times of famine or plague high amounts of vitamin c would boost your immune system and make you more fit to overcome the infection.
If anything this only helps the idea that man was created and not evolved, because any organism not being able to produce vitamin c we would either be selected out or randomly mixed with others that can produce vitamin c. Those that can produce vitamin c would not be selected out of the population because they are not less fit. That goes against the theory of evolution.
So on the one hand we have the theory of evolution suggesting that we share a common ancestor with the great apes and it was in this common ancestor that the ability to produce vitamin c was lost due to a mutation on the gene. This did not pose a problem because, like the majority of the great apes, this common ancestor existed in tropical rain forests which have different species of fruiting trees throughout the year, providing a constant supply of vitamin c in their diet. As this common ancestor evolved, this same vitamin c pseudogene was inherited by it's descendants, today's great apes including humans.
On the other hand we have the argument we were specially created with a broken vitamin c gene, carrying the same disabling mutation as the other great apes, but not bats, guinea pigs and capybaras. And the reasoning behind this is what, exactly? Is it the same reasoning we share other pseudogenes with apes, or the shared ERV sequences, or that extra centromere sequence on chromosome 2?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by jbozz21, posted 05-07-2013 12:08 AM jbozz21 has not replied

  
Meddle
Member (Idle past 1292 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


(1)
Message 193 of 193 (698835)
05-09-2013 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 144 by jbozz21
05-03-2013 11:20 AM


Percy, humans have always have had the ability to digest lactose. I think what your refering to is the adult human's ability to. We are born with it and then loose it after we stop breast feeding. We stopped loosing the ability as adults when we started drinking other animals milks, mainly cows. So that is not new information just old genes that don't get turned off.
You talk of this as if changes in regulation of genes is unimportant, yet in multicellular organisms it is of fundamental importance to how species evolves. As a general idea consider the skeletal structure of tetrapods, whether it's a human, bird, lizard or amphibian. The basic structure is the same, but it is through changes in gene regulation that allows this basic structure to be adapted, so for example an arm becomes a wing.
It can also be seen in human evolution with the gradual increase in brain capacity from Australopithecus to Homo Sapiens (a picture of this was posted recently but can't remember if it was this topic or another). So consider Human Accelerated Regions. These are regions that are highly conserved, the example in the article is HAR-1 which is a 118bp section which only has 2 nucleotides different between chickens and apes. But from apes to man, this region acquired 18 mutations. What is important is that this region includes part of two non-coding RNA genes which are expressed in the brain during foetal development in the telencephalon, and in adults throughout the cerebellum and forebrain. So this change in expression of regulatory genes could have precipitated the evolution of our brain.
Another 48 HAR's have also been identified and many of these have also been associated with neurodevelopment.
Edited by Malcolm, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by jbozz21, posted 05-03-2013 11:20 AM jbozz21 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024