Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8998 total)
72 online now:
jar, PaulK, Stile (3 members, 69 visitors)
Newest Member: Juvenissun
Post Volume: Total: 879,546 Year: 11,294/23,288 Month: 546/1,763 Week: 185/328 Day: 12/88 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How creationism explains babies with tails
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2680 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 10 of 59 (588995)
10-29-2010 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by jonnyk
10-29-2010 12:30 PM


Re: Need some additional info regarding GENES FOR TAIL CONTROL IN HUMANS!
There may well not be the clear demonstration you wish. Human embryo's are a very valuable resource and consequently there is not a very wide set of in-situ characterisation of gene expression patterns in humans.

Similarly familial cases of real tails in humans are incredibly rare, I could only find one referenced in the literature, so there is very little scope for a proper genetic analysis to find a causative locus.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by jonnyk, posted 10-29-2010 12:30 PM jonnyk has not yet responded

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2680 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 16 of 59 (596305)
12-14-2010 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by Granny Magda
12-14-2010 5:39 AM


Re: Polydacty
Less closely related groups, like insects do not use sonic hedgehog, but analogous chemicals.

Pretty misleading statement. The original hedgehog gene was identified in Drosophila, it is more arguably the vertebrates that have a diversified derivative gene family with many hedgehogs indian, desert and sonic.

How badly conserved does a protein need to be before you decide it is a distinct but analogous chemical?

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by Granny Magda, posted 12-14-2010 5:39 AM Granny Magda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Granny Magda, posted 12-14-2010 1:10 PM Wounded King has not yet responded

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2680 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 18 of 59 (596383)
12-14-2010 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Aaron
12-14-2010 1:13 AM


What aspect of his evolutionary past was creeping up?

Arguably none, there is no reason why a mutation has to be an atavism (reversion to an ancestral state). Mutations occur producing embryos with 2 heads, that doesn't mean 2 headed organisms were part of those embryos' evolutionary lineage.

Did our ape ancestors have extra digits too?

The answer depends on what question exactly you are asking. If you mean did ancestral species of great apes commonly posess extra digits the answer is no. If you mean did our ape ancestors also suffer from the sporadic appearance of supernumerary digits, the answer is almost certainly yes.

If you go further back in the evolutionary history of tetrapods though you find many examples of primitive limbs with many more digits than modern tetrapods, principal ones being Acanthostega and Icthyostega with 8 and 7 digits respectively.

Considering the additional ossification and the webbed fingers the most likely developmental pathway to have been affected is probably BMP (Bone morphogenetic protein) which is associated with bone growth, obviously, and also with the regulation of apoptosis in interdigital regions which is responsible for removing the tissue that is present there in the early embryo. As for frog ancestors, certainly an amphibian ancestor is on the cards, again something along the lines of Acanthostega.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Aaron, posted 12-14-2010 1:13 AM Aaron has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020