Role of mutations

I'm not sure if this should be a new topic or if an existing thread can answer my question, but my question is:What is the role of neutral mutations in selection?My first thought upon contemplating this question is that neutral mutations have just as much chance to spread among a group as beneficial ones and then may become beneficial on a grand scale (seeing as how generation upon generaration has been able to pass this on without selective pressure either way) pending some event, or even a non-event, but just the fact that enough of the group now hold this mutation.For example: The evolution of human speech (I am not a biologist or a linguist and have only a basic understanding of how speech may have evolved, so this may be too wide of an example). If a certain individual(s) had the mutation, either for the development of the vocal box or the area in the brain capable of abstract speech/thought, or both, the mutation would not be immediately beneficial to the group as a whole because only the one individual or even a tiny group (possibly isolated from each other at first) would possess this ability. However, over successive generations (the new mutations being neutral and, therefore, not necessarily selected out) the group of individuals would become larger and the gene would then become beneficial to a larger group and those who did not possess it would then possibly be selected out or remain in stasis or branch off because of the new group occupying the same niche. The mutation(s) remains beneficial to the new group and is, consequently, strongly selected for while it remains beneficial.AIE: Although I want to address the neutral mutations first, I suppose the same thing could be said about mutations that in previous generations would have been damaging, but eventually came along at a time where they became beneficial.I guess I am trying to posit that the argument made by some that most mutations are harmful or neutral, and that that somehow negates evolution, could be erroneous because of the possibility of a constantly changing nature of mutations.If this does go to topic, I suppose it should be in the miscellaneous threads. Edited by Jaderis, : No reason given.Edited by Jaderis, : No reason given.

Welcome to EvC Jaderis,Thank you for proposing a new topic and adding to our diversity. Since you are new to EvC, I suggest that you read the Forum Guidelines and familiarize yourself with the functions of EvC by using the Practice Makes Perfect Forum or posting in existing threads while I review your proposed topic.Just some cursory thoughts. Break up the first large paragraph into smaller ones if possible. From the first read through I will probably put it in the Biological Evolution Forum, unless you had another Forum in mind.Please reply to this message when you are ready for me to review the layout of your post again.In the purple signature box below, you'll find some links that will help make your journey here pleasant.Abide by the Forum Guidelines and all will go well.Again welcome and fruitful debating.

---

Usually, in a well-conducted debate, speakers are either emotionally uncommitted or can preserve sufficient detachment to maintain a coolly academic approach.-- Encylopedia Brittanica, on debate

---

I cleaned it up a bit, but if you can think of anything else I can do to make it flow a little better, I would be willing to do more.Biological Evolution sounds good to me.

Thread copied to the Role of Mutations thread in the Biological Evolution forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.