Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,848 Year: 4,105/9,624 Month: 976/974 Week: 303/286 Day: 24/40 Hour: 2/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Endosymbiont theory wrong?
wj
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 43 (19609)
10-11-2002 3:48 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Mammuthus
10-10-2002 5:27 AM


Peter Borger says:
"All information an organism needs to adapt to an environment is already present in the genome. It only has to be activated. This can be in response to external stimuli. The activation may lead to gene shuffling (as recently observed in some bacteria), or maybe even to non-random mutations in promoters.
The SNP we see in genes throughout the genome may be generated in a similar way due to a degenerate mechanism of gene shuffling, non-random mutation etc."
However these assertions appear to be contradicted by the reality of the human GLO pseudogene. What is needed to "activate" the GLO pseudogene? An external stimulus like deficiency in dietary vitamin C intake? Where is the evidence that the pseudogene has ever been activated by SNP mutation (presumably the reinsertion of the common sigle nucleotide deletion)?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Mammuthus, posted 10-10-2002 5:27 AM Mammuthus 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