This more in line with what you would expect from an ID perspective. The idea is that mutations are not random, but that there is an in-built code for activation and selection necessary to move the organism forward. It's fairly interesting.
Additionally, I think it's an error to assume randomnness in the type of mutation. In other words, this shows the frequency of mutation is not random, but governed by cirumstance. It may be that the type of mutation is not random either. Certainly, convergent DNA suggests that, and I would not be surprised to see that the DNA and organism are already programmed to trend in a certain direction in response to specific internal situations.
2. It would be interesting to begin to test for QM effects, or other areas, to see if there is some principles and predetermined dispositions within the chemistry of the DNA.
As far as experiments, this experiment in the OP works nicely. It demonstrates non-randomness in mutations. Non-randmoness in mutations, is by definition, a move away from evolutionary models, and is indicative of design.
By the way, not saying one cannot claim that the non-randomness evolved as well, but the more you go back, you are going to, imo, find that the information and design is embedded in the process as a guiding force, and that a closer look at all the evidence in this light is warranted.