|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: A test for claimed knowledge of how macroevolution occurs | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Dredge writes: Not necessarily."In just 26 generations, we managed to create relationships between the shape and size of (fruit) fly wings that were more extreme than those resulting from more than 50 million years of evolution." - Geir H. Bolstad, researcher at the Norwegian for Nature Research. (sciencedaily.com, "58,000 fruit flies shed light on 100-year old evolutionary question", 2015) Yes, necessarily. What was the genetic diversity in that population? Did they differ by 2% like chimps and humans do?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3
|
Dredge writes: Dog breeders use inbreeding to induce unnatural mutations, And with this post, you have lost all credibility. Inbreeding does not cause unnaturul mutations. Inbreeding increases the chance of pairing rare deleterious recessive alleles that already existed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3
|
Faith writes: Well, I don't think those are mutations, you see, . . . They sequenced the genomes of the father, mother, and child to measure the de novo mutation rate. Those are mutations. You can hold the parent's DNA up to the child's DNA and see where the mutations happened. How can you say that these are not mutations when we can observe them happening in real time? When we compare the rate of mutations happening right now they exactly mimic the genetic differences between people in the human population. How is this not evidence for mutations producing human genetic diversity?
Actually, rather than that I don't understand what you consider to be the basics of genetics, it's that I reject the whole idea that you consider to be those basics, that mutations are the cause of any of this. I would agree that you have to reject everything in genetics in order to hold on to your fantasies, including the most basic concepts of Mendelian genetics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3
|
Just a little context for my previous posts. Here is a chart for transition and transversion substitutions:
Transition mutations are substitutions for bases that are structurally similar. Adenine and guanine have two rings while thymine and cytosine have one ring. Therefore, it is more likely for the protein that is copying DNA to substitute similar bases than dissimilar bases. Due to biochemistry, we would expect naturally caused substitution mutations to be biased towards transitions over transversions. There is also a second major mechanism. If there is a two base sequence CG (called CpG because of the phosphate between them on the DNA backbone) then the C can be methylated by proteins in the cell nucleus. A methylated C can be deaminated into a T.
The fingerprint of naturally occurring mutations is a high rate of CpG mutations and transitions outnumbering transversions. We know this is the natural process because we understand the biochemistry and also observe these same rates in new organisms. When we see this fingerprint in a comparison of genomes it is smoking gun evidence that those differences were produced by known and observable natural processes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3
|
Faith writes: Well, but aren't you just talking about observed differences, and how do you know those differences are the result of mutations rather than the result of sexual recombination producing a new set of alleles? If they were the result of recombination then the child's DNA would match one of the alleles carried by the parents. This isn't what they see. The child has a difference in its DNA not found in either parent, not in any of their alleles. This is a mutation by definition.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3
|
Faith writes: But wouldn't the substitution of one allele for another show the same kinds of differences? No. The child's DNA sequence doesn't match any of the 4 alleles carried by the parents. Here is a simple example. Each parent has two alleles, and the child gets one allele from each parent: Father: AAAAAAAAAAAAAATAAAAAAA Mother:AAAAAAAAAAA AGAAAAAAAAA Child:AAAAAAAACAA AAAAAAAAAAA The child has two all A alleles, on from each parent. However, there was a C mutation that happened in one of those alleles. We know it is a mutation because none of the parents' alleles had that sequence. The child now has a new allele due to that mutation. Are you now saying that mutations never happen? If so, that's just nuts. Edited by Taq, : No reason given. Edited by Taq, : No reason given. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Faith writes: What happens in the DNA when say a brown-eyed Bb father and a brown-eyed Bb mother produce children? The Mendelian formula is one BB, two Bb and one bb, right? How is this expressed in the DNA?Is the parents' B on one strand and b on the other? What happens during the production of sperm and eggs is that the genome is split into two. Some sperm will have B and some sperm will have b. The same for eggs.
I'm sure there must be a different sequence of the four chemicals for a B versus a b, right? Yes. There can also be new mutations that happen in either allele, making it different from the B and b alleles found in the parents.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Faith writes: Could we ignore the mutations issue until I get how the Bs and bs show up in the DNA? You have 23 pairs of chromosomes. Each chromosome of a pair has the same genes, but possibly different versions of those genes called alleles. The different versions differ by DNA sequence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Let's start with mitosis. This is how human cells multiply in your body. You start with 23 pairs of chromosomes, duplicate them, and then separate the duplicates into different cells. (I apologize if the background is black. I included blockcolor code, but apparently it doesn't work for everyone).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Meiosis is a bit more complicated. This is the process that creates egg and sperm, each of which only carries one copy of each chromosome instead of the pairs found in your other cells in your body.
In the first step the chromosomes have already replicated, so they are at the sister chromatids stage in the mitosis picture. This first step is the same as mitosis. However, things get a bit different from here. In meiosis I you get recombination between homologous chromosomes which is often called "crossing over". This usually happens about once per chromosome. After the chromosome pairs have swapped pieces, the pairs are separate from one another. After the pairs are separated, the sister chromatids are separated. What you end up with is sex cells with only half the number of chromosomes. When they combine they produce the usual 23 pairs of chromosomes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Faith writes: I just want to know how the B and the b show up in the DNA. That's exactly what is illustrated in the post on meiosis.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3
|
Dredge writes: Okay, but hypothetically speaking and according to ToE, given millions of years, wouldn't enough mutations occur that could eventually lead to the breeding of a new species? If you are dealing with just a single population through time, how do you determine when they have become a new species? It's a bit like trying to determine when some goes from being skinny to being fat. It's easy to see the differences between the end points, but there isn't a single microsecond in time where they go from being skinny to fat. This is a bit different for two populations of sexually reproducing organisms that split off from one another. In this case, we can determine if they are different species by looking at gene flow and divergence. If there isn't any significant interbreeding between the two populations resulting in the genes of the two populations diverging then they are separate species. Obviously, we can't see if fossils can interbreed with other fossils or with living populations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Just a bit on eye color for Faith:
quote: These are the two genes that affect eye color the most, and they are right next to each other. OCA2 produces a protein that affects how much melanin is produced in the iris. Different variations in the OCA2 gene sequence affect how much melanin is produced in the iris. The HERC2 gene just upstream of OCA2 controls how strongly the OCA2 gene is turned on. This also affects the amount of melanin produced in the iris. Having one allele that causes higher levels of melanin to be produced can result in darker eyes which makes that allele a dominant allele. If you have two alleles for low melanin production then you have low melanin in the iris which results in blue eyes. If little to no melanin is produced then light scatters in the iris without being absorbed by melanin, and the result of this diffraction is the color blue. People with blue eyes don't have a blue colored protein or dye in their eyes. Instead, the blue comes from light scattering in the iris. The same thing happens in some birds. For example, the bluebird isn't actually blue. The color you see is due to the scattering of light in its feathers. added in edit: Another great resource for the genotype-phenotype relationships for eye color:
quote: Edited by Taq, : No reason given. Edited by Taq, : No reason given. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Faith writes: I would expect it to alter it, but not in any beneficial way. Reality doesn't care about your expectations. What you need to do is show how mutations could not result in beneficial changes using actual evidence and facts instead of your expectations. Let's do a bit of math. There are 6 billion bases in the human genome if we are considering both pairs of chromosomes. There are 3 possible substitution mutations at each position in the human genome since there are 3 other bases that can be substituted. This means there are 18 billion possible substitution mutations in the human genome. Each human is born with ~100 substitution mutations. This would mean that in 10 births there are 1,000 mutations. In 1 million births there are 100 million mutations total. In 180 million births there are 18 billion mutations. This would mean that we only need 180 million births to have an even chance of creating all possible substitution mutations at every position in the human genome. There are about 7 billion humans alive right now. This means that every possible substitution mutation has happened about 40 times over in the current population. So can you please tell me why random mutations could not produce beneficial changes in the human genome when every possible mutation has happened 40 times over in the current population? Edited by Taq, : No reason given. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10296 Joined: Member Rating: 7.3 |
Faith writes: What I "expect" isn't about my own guesses, it's about what I've picked up from YOU GUYS by reading various web sites and so on. That's a bit strange since I have stated over and over that random mutations can produce beneficial mutations. Obviously, you are ignoring what we are saying.
Where I used to think a single trait such as eye color was probably governed by many genes, it seems now that it's governed by different regions of a single gene?????? How that works I don't yet grasp since I thought a whole gene made a particular protein, which protein is what brought about the trait. There are multiple genes that can affect eye color, but most variation in eye color is affected by two genes. One of those genes is for the protein, and different mutations will affect the function of that protein. The other gene controls how much of that protein is made.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024