|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1405 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: MACROevolution vs MICROevolution - what is it? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DOCJ Inactive Member |
I was incorrect about how many.. I had something else in mind regarding alleles.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 858 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
No idea what your point is...
Yes plants are much different than animals... You can create RILs with animals too, but instead of using self crosses, you use sibling crosses.
http://www.informatics.jax.org/silver/chapters/9-2.shtml quote: HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DOCJ Inactive Member |
Still looking for a source showing loss of genes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 858 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
Nope.
Recessive traits can be lost due to drift, but so can dominate traits.Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
As I said, there's no need to start a new discussion. There are plenty of existing ones that you can join.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 858 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined:
|
Uhmmm...
Are you expecting me to present a source showing "loss of genes"? OR are you trying to find one?? I have no idea what point you are trying to make... on just about anything you have said in this thread. Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I'm not even sure you can do what I'm talking about with plants. With animals you can [abe: RANDOMLY /abe] select out a number of individuals from a whole population of animals, and that selection as a population unto itself will have a new set of gene frequencies as compared with the parent population.
Is there anything in your scenario comparable to this random selection? This is the first step. You mention drift but after isolation and inbreeding which is a different order. So this number of individuals is separated from the parent population and reproductively isolated. You mention ONE seed as selected. I'm talking about populations. How is one seed comparable to what I'm talking about? So my isolated limited number of individuals is now allowed to inbreed over whatever number of generations it takes to produce a new species, or variety, or population with all the same or roughly the same set of traits. The original selection itself reduces the genetic diversity but as the higher frequency alleles replace the lower frequency alleles over some number of genrations the loss of genetic diversity can increase as some of the low frequency alleles drop out of the population altogether. Do you still think your example is similar enough to what I'm talking about to ask me to think about it further? ABE: Note I added "randomly" in the first sentence in case it wasn't clear without it. Edited by Faith, : No reason given. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 858 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
I will point out a couple more things about this
Isolation and inbreeding occur after selection Selection would be after the initial cross, the F1 progeny. Breeders don't usually select for particular traits to begin the F2 generation because they actually want the distribution to be random. Each of the F2 individuals used to create the lines are isolated (meaning they no longer mix genetically with other lines) at this step - after selecting them from the F1 progeny.
in order to homogenize the new set of gene frequencies brought about by the selection AT the end of 10 generations of inbreeding, each population or line is almost completely homogeneous. More so than what would ever happen in nature in 100 generations.
meaning the reduced number of individuals separated out to be the founders of a daughter population. Each founding population has 1 individual (or 2 in the case of sibling crosses). There is no more severe of a bottleneck / founder effect possible than n=1 (or n=2 for sibling crosses).
Your scenario looks like something entirely different, It is an extreme (the most extreme) example of the scenario which you are presenting.
I don't see any selection. Each line will have its own set of unique characters, whether those characters are directionally selected or not, they WILL be differentiated to the maximum degree. Whatever character is selected (whether by random or by choice), that line will differentiate for that character and will become homogeneous for that character. It is the scenario you are presenting, just an extreme version of it. If those independent lines are going to speciate, there is a missing factor. HBDWhoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
herebedragons Member (Idle past 858 days) Posts: 1517 From: Michigan Joined: |
Yes. See Message 578 for more info.
Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca "Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem. Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DOCJ Inactive Member |
Ok. I also went back to my genetics book and realized the alleles do change thus a loss of data. Simplest example is just inheritance from the parents. However, none of that is showing that new kinds come into existence as I've been saying since post 396.
EvC Forum: MACROevolution vs MICROevolution - what is it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DOCJ Inactive Member |
Ref post 580.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DOCJ Inactive Member |
Ref post 580
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DOCJ Inactive Member |
I already responded to you.
EvC Forum: Creation
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2106 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
none of that is showing that new kinds come into existence... It might be helpful if you didn't use "kinds" as that is a religious term with no scientific definition or application.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity. Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other points of view--William F. Buckley Jr.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DOCJ Inactive Member |
Ref prev post 396 for accepted definition of kind.
Edited by DOCJ, : No reason given. Edited by DOCJ, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024