Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9057 total)
237 online now:
Newest Member: drlove
Post Volume: Total: 889,867 Year: 979/6,534 Month: 979/682 Week: 32/182 Day: 6/26 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How do you define the word Evolution?
Percy
Member
Posts: 20505
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 8.3


Message 2 of 936 (259691)
11-14-2005 4:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by bkelly
11-14-2005 4:10 PM


Darwin's definition:

The change in species over time due to descent with modification and natural selection.

More modern definition:

The change over time of the genetic makeup of species through natural selection operating on accumulated genetic variation and mutations.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by bkelly, posted 11-14-2005 4:10 PM bkelly has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20505
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 8.3


Message 20 of 936 (260235)
11-16-2005 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by coffee_addict
11-16-2005 2:58 AM


Lam writes:

Evolution is a drastic physical change in many individuals of a population or species within one or two generations resulting in the birth of a new population or species and the extinction of the parent population or species by some unknown or unidentifiable mechanism.

Uh, no.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by coffee_addict, posted 11-16-2005 2:58 AM coffee_addict has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20505
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 8.3


Message 30 of 936 (260549)
11-17-2005 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by bkelly
11-16-2005 7:57 PM


Re: small is good
Lam is an evolutionist. He was posting his parody of a Creationist misunderstanding of evolution.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by bkelly, posted 11-16-2005 7:57 PM bkelly has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20505
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 8.3


Message 39 of 936 (260932)
11-18-2005 11:43 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by bkelly
11-18-2005 10:46 AM


Re: another problems of definition
Edited to fix misremembered definitions of mitosis and meiosis.

bkelly writes:

That depends on how we define reconstruct. Lets see if I have this right.

If I understand you correctly, I'm pretty sure you have this wrong. It looks like you're confusing the two halves of a chromosome pair with the two halves of the DNA double helix. You've got the formation of gametes (haploid sexual reproductive cells or meiosis) mixed up with mitosis (cell division). It looks this way to me because you go on to say:

The chromosomes split into two pieces. From each of these two pieces (really each piece seems to be multiple pieces, but the term piece refering to each complete half of the DNA should suffice) the entire and correct dna sequence can be constructed.

Sperm and egg are haploid cells, meaning they only have half the full chromosome complement. For humans, instead of having 23 chromosome pairs like all other cells, sperm and egg have only 23 individual chromosomes. A haploid cell is created during meiosis by selecting only one chromosome from each pair.

Every chromosome is a lengthy and tightly coiled strand of DNA. During mitosis every chromosome (all 46 in humans) has it's DNA split down the middle, and each half goes to one of the two cells created by the division. These DNA halves are used as templates to rebuild copies of the original DNA strands. These rebuilt strands form the chromosomes (again, 46 in humans) which then gather back together into the chromosome pairs (23 in humans).

--Percy

This message has been edited by Percy, 11-18-2005 12:43 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by bkelly, posted 11-18-2005 10:46 AM bkelly has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by crashfrog, posted 11-18-2005 1:38 PM Percy has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20505
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 8.3


Message 43 of 936 (260970)
11-18-2005 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by crashfrog
11-18-2005 1:38 PM


Re: another problems of definition
You're very likely right, or at least more right than me. Hopefully I was able to make clear to bkelly that's he's confusing mitosis and meiosis, whatever be the detailed specifics.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by crashfrog, posted 11-18-2005 1:38 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by crashfrog, posted 11-18-2005 1:54 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20505
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 8.3


Message 429 of 936 (806132)
04-23-2017 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 419 by Dredge
04-23-2017 12:59 AM


Re: If Not, What?
Dredge writes:

Regardless, I'm still in the dark about how what happens after the bacteria are exposed to the antibiotic. What is the connection between exposure to the toxin and the surviving bacteria producing a beneficial mutation that is passed on to the next generation?

Bacterial populations are always producing mutations. An antibiotic does not change this. Adding an antibiotic to a bacterial population does not change the way it produces mutations, except perhaps the stress caused by the antibiotic might cause more copying errors (mutations) during reproduction.

Billions of reproducing bacteria produce billions of different mutations. If one of those mutations confers a defense against the antibiotic then since the descendant bacteria will be more likely to survive and produce offspring they will eventually dominate the bacterial population.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 419 by Dredge, posted 04-23-2017 12:59 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 470 by Dredge, posted 04-24-2017 10:57 PM Percy has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20505
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 8.3


Message 479 of 936 (806376)
04-25-2017 8:49 AM
Reply to: Message 470 by Dredge
04-24-2017 10:57 PM


Re: If Not, What?
Dredge writes:

Since, as you say, the antibiotic doesn't change the way bacteria populations mutate, how is it possible to determine if particular post-antibiotic mutations are due to the antibiotic or due to "natural" mutations (that may have occurred without the antibiotic)?

Few reproductive events produce perfect copying of the genetic material, hence copying almost always produces mutations, and they are random with respect to adaptation. Mutations are always occurring in bacterial populations, including mutations that would protect against an antibiotic. When an antibiotic is added then bacteria with a protective mutation have an advantage.

Mutations continue to occur after the antibiotic is added, but I'm not aware of any evidence for whether they they are different in character from before the antibiotic was added. Mutations generally are random copying errors and can occur anywhere and be of any of a number of different types. Again, mutations are random with regard to adaptation. Likely the frequency and severity of mutations increases in populations under stress.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 470 by Dredge, posted 04-24-2017 10:57 PM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 498 by Dredge, posted 04-27-2017 3:14 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022