Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
10 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How novel features evolve #2
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 61 of 402 (664211)
05-29-2012 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Taq
05-29-2012 5:28 PM


Evidence please.
No, he's quite right. Environmental stresses and stimuli cannot exercise the creative causation of highly complex pre-coded genetic information that underlies irreducibly complex systems of adaptation. Nothing can exercise the creative causation of highly complex pre-coded genetic information that underlies irreducibly complex systems of adaptation. Nothing can exercise an invisible pink unicorn either.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Taq, posted 05-29-2012 5:28 PM Taq has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(3)
Message 62 of 402 (664212)
05-29-2012 11:48 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by zaius137
05-29-2012 4:04 PM


Unfortunately, you mix up what comes first in selective pressure. You see there must be certain coloration of mice first before there is any kind of selection to take place. Therefore, if you talk about sexual selection then the mutation or alleles are already expressed in the population and all the predators have to do is select those individuals that do not express the beneficial coloration (Concentration of specific alleles).
You see mouse coloration is pre —existing so you cannot say it has arisen because of natural selection. Remember, survival of the fittest is not creation of the fittest.
Let’s see some ware in this thread one of has claimed that the genetic structure was pre-existing. Who was that?
Now you have a population of selected individuals with concentrations of beneficial alleles for camouflage. Was the development of beneficial coloration a new and novel trait? No because it had to show up before selection could even work on it. Is other populations of this species devoid of these alleles? No again, because other members occasionally show up with the desired coat color under lower selective pressure (or neutral pressure) because of Mendelian genetics.
Again the crux of your argument must consider fixation of these mutations in a population before you can actually say these Novel Traits arose and are not just deformed individuals.
By the way, when I refer to molecular mechanisms it is not sexual reproduction.
You seem once more to be composing your posts by drawing words at random out of a hat.
Would it be possible for us to speak to the hat directly?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by zaius137, posted 05-29-2012 4:04 PM zaius137 has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(2)
Message 63 of 402 (664236)
05-30-2012 7:59 AM


There have been a couple of further studies by the same people on these mice that add to the evidence. This one shows that natural selection is the mechanism that matches dark mice with dark rocks and light mice with light rocks. (Sadly, I can see only the abstract)
Previous work has demonstrated that two Mc1r alleles, D and d, differ by four amino acids, and are responsible for the color polymorphism: DD and Dd genotypes are melanic whereas dd genotypes are light colored. To determine the frequency of the two Mc1r allelic classes across the dark-colored lava and neighboring light-colored granite, we sequenced the Mc1r gene in 175 individuals from a 35-km transect in the Pinacate lava region. We also sequenced two neutral mtDNA genes, COIII and ND3, in the same individuals. We found a strong correlation between Mc1r allele frequency and habitat color and no correlation between mtDNA markers and habitat color. Using estimates of migration from mtDNA haplotypes between dark- and light-colored sampling sites and Mc1r allele frequencies at each site, we estimated selection coefficients against mismatched Mc1r alleles, assuming a simple model of migration-selection balance. Habitat-dependent selection appears strong but asymmetric: selection is stronger against light mice on dark rock than against melanic mice on light rock. Together these results suggest that natural selection acts to match pocket mouse coat color to substrate color, despite high levels of gene flow between light and melanic populations.
Jun;58(6):1329-41.
Ecological genetics of adaptive color polymorphism in pocket mice: geographic variation in selected and neutral genes - PubMed
The writers of these papers are very confident that they have identified the genes responsible for coloration in the mice that they have studied (but not other mice in other locations) and say that the difference is 4 amino acids.
How confident can we be that the allele changes are as a result of a mutation of an 'original' gene?

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

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 8:35 PM Tangle has replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3409 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 64 of 402 (664282)
05-30-2012 8:04 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Tangle
05-29-2012 4:39 PM


Tangle my friend...
The order things happen in is:
Mutation of a gene that affects hair colouration occurs in a mouse
Mouse can sit on a dark rock without being eaten by predators
Mouse mates and passes on its brown genes
More brown mice are born and can sit on brown rocks unmolested
Any beige mice born are eaten by preditors
Brown mice breed
Etc
ie the standard theory.
I have a question; does every color change await a mutation of a gene? There must be an underlining adaptable mechanism built into the genome. If natural selection is the main mechanism of causation, there has to be a molecular interface between the resulting gene and environmental pressure. This interface should be discernable and explainable.
Why is there heterozygosity of coloration remaining in the selected population of mice if say black mice are selected to be more fit?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Tangle, posted 05-29-2012 4:39 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by jar, posted 05-30-2012 8:14 PM zaius137 has replied
 Message 67 by RAZD, posted 05-30-2012 8:44 PM zaius137 has replied
 Message 78 by Tangle, posted 05-31-2012 2:49 AM zaius137 has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 65 of 402 (664285)
05-30-2012 8:14 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by zaius137
05-30-2012 8:04 PM


listen..hear that woosh?
That's folk telling you the same thing yet again.
If natural selection is the main mechanism of causation, there has to be a molecular interface between the resulting gene and environmental pressure.
Natural selection always operates after the fact, it never causes any change.
See Message 55.
There is a population of mice.
The mice have baby mice.
Not all the copies are perfect, some have mutations.
Some baby mice are tan.
Some baby mice are dark gray.
Some baby mice are bright pink with yellow and green stripes.
The baby mice that are tan go out to eat and play. Those that stay on the tan rocks find lots of food and have fun playing. They grow up and marry the mouse next door and have lots of pretty tan baby mice.
Those that play on the dark gray rock though get eaten by predators and don't get to play or have fun or grow up to marry the mouse next door and have lots of pretty tan baby mice.
The baby mice that are dark gray go out to eat and play. Those that stay on the dark gray rocks find lots of food and have fun playing. They grow up and marry the mouse next door and have lots of pretty dark gray baby mice.
Those that play on the tan rock though get eaten by predators and don't get to play or have fun or grow up to marry the mouse next door and have lots of pretty dark gray baby mice.
The baby mice that are bright pink with yellow and green stripes go out to eat and play. They get eaten.
Soon there are two populations of mice, tan mice and dark gray mice and bad little mice are told, "If you do that again you will turn pink with yellow and green stripes and get eaten! And it will make you go blind too!".
See Message 57
And we can go all the way back to message 26 in this thread. See Message 26
Edited by jar, : fix sib-title

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 8:04 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 8:49 PM jar has replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3409 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 66 of 402 (664286)
05-30-2012 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Tangle
05-30-2012 7:59 AM


Tangle my friend.
Oh boy another mouse paper. Thanks for your citation; was this linked in the last paper? .
Together these results suggest that natural selection acts to match pocket mouse coat color to substrate color, despite high levels of gene flow between light and melanic populations.
Ecological genetics of adaptive color polymorphism in pocket mice: geographic variation in selected and neutral genes - PubMed
Two thumbs up for Natural Selection and microevolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Tangle, posted 05-30-2012 7:59 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by RAZD, posted 05-30-2012 8:53 PM zaius137 has not replied
 Message 79 by Tangle, posted 05-31-2012 2:53 AM zaius137 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 67 of 402 (664288)
05-30-2012 8:44 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by zaius137
05-30-2012 8:04 PM


Hi zaius137
I have a question; does every color change await a mutation of a gene? ...
No.
Not one color change sits there waiting for the gene mutation to go running out onto the stage of life. There is no cause or deterministic aspect.
Mutation happens.
Because of mutation A color change happens.
IF color change is NOT deleterious to the individual with it,
THEN the color change will propagate in the population.
IF color change IS deleterious to the individual with it,
THEN the color change will disappear in the population.
IF the color change allows individual with it to populate a neighboring ecology
THEN it allows more opportunities for the individuals with the color change.
It does not matter what the color change actually is, just that
  1. that it is different
  2. that it is not deleterious
This adds variation to the gene pool of the breeding population and that gives it more opportunities to take advantage of that did not exist before, as well as more challenges.
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : db

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 8:04 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 9:18 PM RAZD has replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3409 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 68 of 402 (664290)
05-30-2012 8:49 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by jar
05-30-2012 8:14 PM


Re: listen..hear that woosh?
jar my friend
Again
Two thumbs up for Natural Selection and microevolution. Tan and Dark gray mice remain reversible. However, the pink with yellow and green stripes seem to be engineered by Man (expression of latent maniacal humor).
Soon there are two populations of mice, tan mice and dark gray mice and bad little mice are told, "If you do that again you will turn pink with yellow and green stripes and get eaten! And it will make you go blind too!".
So now exchange the two populations to the others environment. I bet that the tan mice turn dark grey and the gray mice turn tan. Microevolution is reversible.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by jar, posted 05-30-2012 8:14 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by jar, posted 05-30-2012 8:52 PM zaius137 has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 69 of 402 (664291)
05-30-2012 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by zaius137
05-30-2012 8:49 PM


Re: listen..hear that woosh?
Whoooooosh
The mice do not turn tan or turn dark gray.
Let's try this again but slowly.
There is a population of mice.
The mice have baby mice.
Not all the copies are perfect, some have mutations.
Do you understand that?

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 8:49 PM zaius137 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 70 of 402 (664292)
05-30-2012 8:53 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by zaius137
05-30-2012 8:35 PM


Hi again zaius137
Two thumbs up for Natural Selection and microevolution.
Actually that should be either two thumbs up for natural selection and mutation OR just two thumbs up for (micro)evolution:
The process of evolution involves changes in the composition of hereditary traits, and changes to the frequency of their distributions within breeding populations from generation to generation, in response to ecological challenges and opportunities.
All evolution occurs within breeding populations. If you want to discuss macroevolution we can take this to MACROevolution vs MICROevolution - what is it?
I haven't had a creationist define what amount of change is necessary. At least not in any usable way.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 8:35 PM zaius137 has not replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3409 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 71 of 402 (664295)
05-30-2012 9:18 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by RAZD
05-30-2012 8:44 PM


RAZD my friend
No.
Not one color change sits there waiting for the gene mutation to go running out onto the stage of life. There is no cause or deterministic aspect.
Mutation happens.
Because of mutation A color change happens.
IF color change is NOT deleterious to the individual with it,
THEN the color change will propagate in the population.
IF color change IS deleterious to the individual with it,
THEN the color change will disappear in the population.
IF the color change allows individual with it to populate a neighboring ecology
THEN it allows more opportunities for the individuals with the color change.
It does not matter what the color change actually is, just that
that it is different
that it is not deleterious
This adds variation to the gene pool of the breeding population and that gives it more opportunities to take advantage of that did not exist before, as well as more challenges.
You are actually saying that mutation alone is generating mice coloration; then it is somehow fixed in a population to be recalled later by natural selection.
First you must deal with the consequences of fixation in a population (see Haldane). Then you must preserve these changes against sweeps of phenotypic variation but be able to expose these changes to the organism under selective pressure. This says nothing about the origination of these genes in the first place.
The process you describe above seems very simple on the surface and very Darwinian. The only problem is that such propositions are highly problematical and have not yet been described by the evolutionist in terms of molecular mechanisms.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by RAZD, posted 05-30-2012 8:44 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by RAZD, posted 05-30-2012 9:38 PM zaius137 has replied
 Message 73 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-30-2012 9:59 PM zaius137 has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(2)
Message 72 of 402 (664300)
05-30-2012 9:38 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by zaius137
05-30-2012 9:18 PM


Getting off topic here
Hi zaius137
You are actually saying that mutation alone is generating mice coloration; ...
Correct.
... then it is somehow fixed in a population to be recalled later by natural selection.
Wrong.
It spreads in the population if it is not deleterious, which means that there is insufficient negative selection to harm the carrier.
Natural selection is the individuals (with whatever mutations they have) surviving to breed better than others (those without the mutations).
A mutation becomes fixed in a breeding population when it spreads to the point where it is common in the population.
First you must deal with the consequences of fixation in a population (see Haldane) ...
Nope, all I need to do is watch it happen. If someone's hypothesis says X can't happen and I see X happen,k then I know that the hypothesis is false and invalid.
... Then you must preserve these changes against sweeps of phenotypic variation but be able to expose these changes to the organism under selective pressure. ...
There is just so much wrong with that assertion that I don't know where to start.
The changes are preserved or not preserved via natural selection.
The "sweeps of phenotypic variation" are new mutations in the breeding population that also then undergo natural selection.
The changes are "exposed" in the carriers via their ability to survive and breed - ie natural selection.
It isn't a "selective pressure" it is a selection pressure: their ability to survive and breed compared to others.
The process you describe above seems very simple on the surface and very Darwinian. ...
That is because the process IS very simple.
... The only problem is that such propositions are highly problematical ...
Curiously I see no problem at all. You can observe the process occurring in every population of every species in every generation.
... and have not yet been described by the evolutionist in terms of molecular mechanisms ...
... to your unwilling satisfaction.
Again, you ability to see, or not see, that mutation provides variation within the breeding population, and that selection filters for the parents of the next generation, are not critical to whether or not the process occurs.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 9:18 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 11:08 PM RAZD has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 73 of 402 (664303)
05-30-2012 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by zaius137
05-30-2012 9:18 PM


You are actually saying that mutation alone is generating mice coloration; then it is somehow fixed in a population to be recalled later by natural selection.
But again this is meaningless. "Fixed in a population to be recalled later by natural selection" is so meaningless as to be not even wrong, it's just gibberish.
First you must deal with the consequences of fixation in a population (see Haldane). Then you must preserve these changes against sweeps of phenotypic variation but be able to expose these changes to the organism under selective pressure.
Again, this is not a description of anything. "Sweeps of phenotypic variation"?
And this makes it very hard to correct your misapprehensions, because your fundamental misunderstanding of the content of genetics is obscured by your superficial misunderstanding of the language of genetics.
The process you describe above seems very simple on the surface and very Darwinian. The only problem is that such propositions are highly problematical and have not yet been described by the evolutionist in terms of molecular mechanisms.
The molecular mechanisms are reproduction and mutation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 9:18 PM zaius137 has not replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3409 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 74 of 402 (664310)
05-30-2012 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by RAZD
05-30-2012 9:38 PM


Re: Getting off topic here
RAZD my friend
Your scenario is right in line with most evolutionists’ beliefs (that is the good news) but those suppositions do not hold up under scientific investigation (that is the bad news).
Nope, all I need to do is watch it happen. If someone's hypothesis says X can't happen and I see X happen,k then I know that the hypothesis is false and invalid.
The problem is it has never been observed
Do you know who Haldane is? Major evolution calculations are based on Haldane’s work.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by RAZD, posted 05-30-2012 9:38 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-30-2012 11:30 PM zaius137 has replied
 Message 84 by Taq, posted 05-31-2012 11:12 AM zaius137 has not replied
 Message 96 by RAZD, posted 05-31-2012 9:49 PM zaius137 has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(2)
Message 75 of 402 (664311)
05-30-2012 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by zaius137
05-30-2012 11:08 PM


Re: Getting off topic here
Your scenario is right in line with most evolutionists’ beliefs (that is the good news) but those suppositions do not hold up under scientific investigation (that is the bad news).
Well, scientists think they do. If you, who manage to make about one serious blunder per paragraph do not, maybe the problem is with you.
The problem is it has never been observed
Well again scientists, the people who make the observations, beg to differ.
Do you know who Haldane is? Major evolution calculations are based on Haldane’s work.
Yes. Also major creationist mistakes.
Gather round children, a creationist's going to be wrong about Haldane again! They're so cute when they do that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 11:08 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by zaius137, posted 05-30-2012 11:49 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024