Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
56 online now:
AZPaul3, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), nwr (3 members, 53 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,178 Year: 4,290/6,534 Month: 504/900 Week: 28/182 Day: 16/12 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Iconic Peppered Moth - gene mutation found
JonF
Member
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 16 of 76 (785370)
06-03-2016 4:36 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by Faith
06-03-2016 5:14 AM


Re: not wierd at all.
Same process exactly, while losing the allele for the white moths.

Little problem there. Whatever genetics produce light moths remains in the population. There are always a few light moths. As the trees' barks get lighter on average (because of the great decrease in pollution allowing increased lichen growth) the population is changing and now there are far more light moths than dark moths.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Faith, posted 06-03-2016 5:14 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Faith, posted 06-03-2016 7:51 PM JonF has taken no action

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8519
Joined: 03-06-2009


Message 17 of 76 (785372)
06-03-2016 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Faith
06-02-2016 4:48 AM


Faith writes:

how is it that a mutation so suited to the needs of the creature just happened to come along at the right time? Aren't mutations random accidents in DNA replication, and very rare and so on? Or is the ToE now reverting to Lamarckianism?

Where is there any evidence that the mutation only came about when it was needed?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Faith, posted 06-02-2016 4:48 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 06-03-2016 7:50 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8519
Joined: 03-06-2009


Message 18 of 76 (785373)
06-03-2016 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Faith
06-02-2016 11:29 PM


Re: not wierd at all.
Faith writes:

Even a dominant can more or less disappear in a large population where the recessive is strongly selected. That's how you can get a predominantly blue-eyed population.

The only way you get dominant and recessive alleles of the same gene is through mutations. The reason that they are dominant and recessive is due to DNA sequence differences brought on by mutations.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Faith, posted 06-02-2016 11:29 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Faith, posted 06-03-2016 7:43 PM Taq has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 679 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 19 of 76 (785377)
06-03-2016 7:43 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Taq
06-03-2016 4:57 PM


Re: not wierd at all.
The only way you get dominant and recessive alleles of the same gene is through mutations. The reason that they are dominant and recessive is due to DNA sequence differences brought on by mutations.

That's pure theory, not something known by observation. If genetic material was built in from the Creation it included all the dominant and recessive forms of alleles and their combinations just as Mendel spelled them out. And it's bizarre to think you NEED mutations, since if you did get them as reliably as claimed, they would act EXACTLY like the built-in alleles would act anyway.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Taq, posted 06-03-2016 4:57 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Tangle, posted 06-04-2016 3:08 AM Faith has replied
 Message 35 by 14174dm, posted 06-04-2016 11:26 AM Faith has taken no action
 Message 57 by Taq, posted 06-06-2016 5:52 PM Faith has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 679 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 20 of 76 (785378)
06-03-2016 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Taq
06-03-2016 4:55 PM


Where is there any evidence that the mutation only came about when it was needed?

In Tangle's original post where he quoted the date for its appearance in the late 1800s at the height of the Industrial Revolution.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Taq, posted 06-03-2016 4:55 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by NoNukes, posted 06-03-2016 9:16 PM Faith has taken no action
 Message 23 by JonF, posted 06-03-2016 9:22 PM Faith has taken no action
 Message 58 by Taq, posted 06-06-2016 5:53 PM Faith has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 679 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 21 of 76 (785379)
06-03-2016 7:51 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by JonF
06-03-2016 4:36 PM


Re: not wierd at all.
I was talking about the rise of the black moths due to the blackened tree trunks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by JonF, posted 06-03-2016 4:36 PM JonF has taken no action

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 76 (785381)
06-03-2016 9:16 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
06-03-2016 7:50 PM


In Tangle's original post where he quoted the date for its appearance in the late 1800s at the height of the Industrial Revolution.

I believe the quoted date was 1819+/- or so and not the late 1800s. That puts the age of the gene somewhere during the transition 50 year period leading up to the Industrial Revolution. The gene seems to have preceded the time when factories were belching out smoke. The height of the period would have been much later. Wikipedia gives dates for the first citings of the moths that are consistent with the age of the mutation.

I understand that Tangle originated the idea that the date was coincidental with the height of the Industrial Revolution, but that does not really seem to be the case. Much less of a coincidence, but is it really that surprising? Absent the mutation, the moth might have have been wiped out, but that might only have made it one of the species that have been lost since industrialization.

I think it is also important to note that because the gene is dominant, it also results in prolonged survival of white moths because some members of the species will carry the recessive gene while still being dark. So there is no immediate, permanent loss of genetic diversity.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 06-03-2016 7:50 PM Faith has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Tangle, posted 06-04-2016 2:56 AM NoNukes has seen this message

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 23 of 76 (785382)
06-03-2016 9:22 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by Faith
06-03-2016 7:50 PM


That is evidence that it happened at a time when it was convenient, not that it only happened at a time when it was convenient. I've seen articles discussing how often the mutation happens. There's some reason to believe that it happens a few times a century or so, although I've forgotten the details.

But your original comment can't be addressed without an estimate of how often it happens.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Faith, posted 06-03-2016 7:50 PM Faith has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 06-03-2016 10:12 PM JonF has taken no action

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33893
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(4)
Message 24 of 76 (785384)
06-03-2016 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by JonF
06-03-2016 9:22 PM


The thing Faith needs to remember is that it really is a multipart system. Mutations causing dark moths may well have been happening all along but before the soot phase of the industrial revolution they were simply dinner. It was only when the selection pressure changed that the dark moths had an advantage.

It was selection that determined this particular mutation got preserved. Any earlier examples of a similar mutation would have just been putting food on the table.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by JonF, posted 06-03-2016 9:22 PM JonF has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 6:15 AM jar has replied
 Message 59 by Taq, posted 06-06-2016 6:00 PM jar has taken no action

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8487
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 25 of 76 (785396)
06-04-2016 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by NoNukes
06-03-2016 9:16 PM


NN writes:

In Tangle's original post where he quoted the date for its appearance in the late 1800s at the height of the Industrial Revolution.
I believe the quoted date was 1819+/- or so and not the late 1800s. That puts the age of the gene somewhere during the transition 50 year period leading up to the Industrial Revolution. The gene seems to have preceded the time when factories were belching out smoke. The height of the period would have been much later. Wikipedia gives dates for the first citings of the moths that are consistent with the age of the mutation.

I understand that Tangle originated the idea that the date was coincidental with the height of the Industrial Revolution, but that does not really seem to be the case. Much less of a coincidence, but is it really that surprising? Absent the mutation, the moth might have have been wiped out, but that might only have made it one of the species that have been lost since industrialization.

The wiki actually says
"The Industrial Revolution was the transition to new manufacturing processes in the period from about 1760 to sometime between 1820 and 1840."

The date of the mutation is given at around 1819.

Dr Pascal Campagne, who worked on the study, said: "Our best estimate of 1819 shows that the mutation event occurred during the industrial revolution and that it took around 30 years for it to become common enough to be noticed."

The first documented sighting of a black moth was in Manchester in 1848. (Manchester was a particularly filthy city surrounded by coal mines, iron foundries and cotton mills powered by coal.)


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by NoNukes, posted 06-03-2016 9:16 PM NoNukes has seen this message

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8487
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 26 of 76 (785397)
06-04-2016 3:08 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by Faith
06-03-2016 7:43 PM


Re: not wierd at all.
Faith writes:

That's pure theory, not something known by observation.

The peppered moth's evolution from white to black and back to white again is pure observation. That's how we know about it - it is documented.

The mechanism that allows the selective survival of black moths over white moths has been observed - the darkening of the trees on which the moths rest during the day leaving them open to predation against the newly black trunks. The predation process was reversed when the trees were no longer black. Observed and documented.

The mutation that caused the original colour change from white to black has now been observed and dated.

You no longer have an objection, this is the direct, observed evidence for evolution that you have been asking for.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Faith, posted 06-03-2016 7:43 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 6:18 AM Tangle has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 679 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 27 of 76 (785398)
06-04-2016 6:15 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by jar
06-03-2016 10:12 PM


Yes it's totally weird
The thing Faith needs to remember is that it really is a multipart system. Mutations causing dark moths may well have been happening all along but before the soot phase of the industrial revolution they were simply dinner. It was only when the selection pressure changed that the dark moths had an advantage.
It was selection that determined this particular mutation got preserved. Any earlier examples of a similar mutation would have just been putting food on the table.

If you'd been following my posts you would know that this is exactly what I said would be the situation if the black moth alleles were built in. While the whites were selected the blacks would show up from time to time in heterozygous form and be picked off by predators. It was only when the whites started getting picked off instead (selected against) that the blacks could start to multiply.

Same thing whether built in or mutated. If a black mutation occurred during the white advantage and managed to survive, then it would fare exactly as it would if it was a built in allele -- its numbers would stay small because of being constantly picked off by predators. However, if it did arise during the time the whites had the advantage it would have a very low probability of surviving at all.

But you even have black moth mutations "happening all along" as if it's that common an event that the same locus has the same mutation over and over again? Is mutation ever described in such terms?

If the timing is that exquisite that it has to happen either over and over again, or just when the conditions for its selection are optimum, is this really mutation, meaning a random accident of replication? What are the odds?

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by jar, posted 06-03-2016 10:12 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by jar, posted 06-04-2016 8:22 AM Faith has replied
 Message 46 by caffeine, posted 06-05-2016 10:10 AM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 679 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 28 of 76 (785399)
06-04-2016 6:18 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Tangle
06-04-2016 3:08 AM


Very weird indeed
I wasn't talking about the single mutation of the peppered moths but responding to Taq's generalization about mutations in general.

However, I'll respond to this:

The peppered moth's evolution from white to black and back to white again is pure observation. That's how we know about it - it is documented.

The mechanism that allows the selective survival of black moths over white moths has been observed - the darkening of the trees on which the moths rest during the day leaving them open to predation against the newly black trunks. The predation process was reversed when the trees were no longer black. Observed and documented.

That much is common knowledge, and quite easily explained in terms of a built-in allele for the black moth.

Mutation is in fact harder to explain. See my post to jar above. There is something very very weird about the idea that it was a mutation instead of built-in for the reasons I give there. You either need many same or similar mutations at the same locus to counteract the constant loss to predation, which doesn't fit with the general observations of mutations as random accidents of replication, or you have to count on one mutation surviving against ridiculous odds, or showing up so exactly at the right time that only a teleological mechanism could explain it. Not what the ToE normally has in mind.

There has to be something wrong with the science that supposedly "observed" this mutation.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Tangle, posted 06-04-2016 3:08 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-04-2016 11:15 AM Faith has replied
 Message 36 by Tangle, posted 06-04-2016 2:15 PM Faith has replied

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33893
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 29 of 76 (785403)
06-04-2016 8:22 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Faith
06-04-2016 6:15 AM


Re: Yes it's totally weird
Faith writes:

If you'd been following my posts you would know that this is exactly what I said would be the situation if the black moth alleles were built in. While the whites were selected the blacks would show up from time to time in heterozygous form and be picked off by predators. It was only when the whites started getting picked off instead (selected against) that the blacks could start to multiply.

But Faith you have provided no evidence of any built in conditions and all the evidence shows that is NOT the case nor have you provided a model, process, mechanism, procedure or thingamabob that would explain how the genes would get transferred when the critter gets eaten immediately.

Faith writes:

But you even have black moth mutations "happening all along" as if it's that common an event that the same locus has the same mutation over and over again?

Again, no one but you is making such a claim. We cannot know about the frequency or whether or not there are multiple genetic pathways to dark moths but all the evidence seems to show that there are several possible genetic pathways to almost any condition.

Faith writes:

If the timing is that exquisite that it has to happen either over and over again, or just when the conditions for its selection are optimum, is this really mutation, meaning a random accident of replication? What are the odds?

Of course it is random just as selection is random. And we do know for a fact (as I have pointed out to you) that mutations do happen constantly and in every generation of almost every population (there are populations of cloned critters where there is no genetic variation but moths are not one of those critters).

Remember when I pointed out to you that your DNA is unique and identifies YOU uniquely? Even the DNA of siblings born from the same Mother and Father is different enough to uniquely identify each individual.

Those differences are due to mutations.

So we know mutations happen all the time.

We know that selection changes all the time.

We know that samples of DNA from critters that lived tens of thousands of years ago show DNA that is still similar enough to what we see today to allow us to identify the species even when the sample is just from stomach contents.

The current Theory of Evolution provided a model, mechanism, method and procedure that explains what is seen.

The evidence from all lines of inquiry and science support that model.

There is no "exquisite timing". The odds of anything that did happen in the past is now 100%.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 6:15 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by JonF, posted 06-04-2016 8:28 AM jar has replied
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 9:20 AM jar has replied

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 30 of 76 (785405)
06-04-2016 8:28 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by jar
06-04-2016 8:22 AM


Re: Yes it's totally weird
Of course it is random just as selection is random

Missing a "not:?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by jar, posted 06-04-2016 8:22 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by jar, posted 06-04-2016 8:56 AM JonF has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022