Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,879 Year: 4,136/9,624 Month: 1,007/974 Week: 334/286 Day: 55/40 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   from tree to web?
Taq
Member
Posts: 10084
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 3 of 20 (502823)
03-13-2009 2:23 PM


This New Scientist article is probably the source. This is a secondary article. You can read the abstract from the primary source [The impact of reticulate evolution on genome phylogeny - PubMed]here[/url].
What Doolittle and Bapteste are saying is that lateral gene trasfer was common early in life before animals came along. This prevents us from constructing a true, single tree for ALL life. However, the tree still stands for big, macroscopic animals because there is a lack of lateral gene transfer.
For the creationists, this is a non-winner. In order for them to use this evidence they must first agree that all life evolved from unicellular organisms.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Stagamancer, posted 03-13-2009 2:45 PM Taq has replied
 Message 8 by CosmicChimp, posted 03-13-2009 7:54 PM Taq has replied
 Message 10 by dwise1, posted 03-13-2009 8:11 PM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10084
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 5 of 20 (502831)
03-13-2009 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by Stagamancer
03-13-2009 2:45 PM


So while this makes the "trunk" of the tree more complicated,
I prefer the metaphor "the root ball of life".
The figure below is taken from Doolittle's Scientific American article "Uprooting the Tree of Life" (February 2000). Scientific American

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Stagamancer, posted 03-13-2009 2:45 PM Stagamancer has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Stagamancer, posted 03-13-2009 7:35 PM Taq has not replied
 Message 7 by Coragyps, posted 03-13-2009 7:53 PM Taq has not replied
 Message 9 by Granny Magda, posted 03-13-2009 8:06 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10084
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 12 of 20 (502884)
03-13-2009 9:18 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by CosmicChimp
03-13-2009 7:54 PM


You mean to tell me that there is absolutely no horizontal/lateral gene transfer? I think there must be a little of it going on for sure somewhere....
I mean look at all the experiments food engineers are running. What about retroviruses? There must be a ton of other similar such going on, no?
It is happening with human engineered species. My favorite is the Glofish. It carries a copy of the jellyfish GFP gene which causes it to fluoresce in UV light. I haven't dug into the history behind the Glofish, but I strongly suspect that it has it's roots in the basic research lab. GFP reporter genes are common place in evo-devo studies that study transcription factors. Anyway . . .
As to retroviruses, it comes close. However, this does not involve transfer of DNA from one species to the next but it does cause divergent species to share DNA not found in their common ancestor. There is also the case of mitochondrial DNA making it's way into the host genome. If you still consider mitochondria to be an endosymbiot this may count, but barely.
If this were going on it would be pretty easy to spot given the wealth of genomic data that is out there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by CosmicChimp, posted 03-13-2009 7:54 PM CosmicChimp has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10084
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 13 of 20 (502885)
03-13-2009 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Granny Magda
03-13-2009 8:06 PM


Re: The Coral Fungus of Life?
For the record, I thought that the New Scientist cover was needlessly sensationalist. It came in for a lot of criticism from prominent scientists and has been waved around by gleeful creationists from the moment it was published.
It's also worth mentioning that the lack of a tree due to HGT has been known for quite a while. It's old news.
However, this is actually a perfect trap for creationists. We should just let them run free with this for a little while. All we have to do is ask them what methodologies these scientists used in order to detect HGT. They will then have to accept common ancestry between speices that are not in the same "kind".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Granny Magda, posted 03-13-2009 8:06 PM Granny Magda 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