identical twins?
Yes.So, those with known function resisted change, but those "functionless" ones keep changing, Right?
The rate of mutation -- the rate at which new variants appear -- is the same, but the rate of substitution -- the rate at which new variants replace old ones in the population -- is suppressed at functional sites.If so, how fast is the rate of mutation on those functionless ones?
Yes.
The rate of mutation -- the rate at which new variants appear -- is the same, but the rate of substitution -- the rate at which new variants replace old ones in the population -- is suppressed at functional sites.
In the long run the substitution rate at sites nonfunctional sites is just the mutation rate, which is about 1.2 x 10^-8 mutations per base-pair per generation, according to current estimates.
isnt that how you would know that babies are born with certain personalities??
Is the personality of a person cultured or born with? From examples of identical twins, I tend to think it is something we born to have. If so, what is the origin of it? It should not be (or is more than) a biological inheritance (controlled by some DNAs. Do identical twins have identical DNA?).I wonder what have we known about it through science.
We are born with dispositions. Our personalities develop around our given dispositions based on environment. I've seen twins born, one slept a lot, the other pulled on oxygen tubes like a mountain climber. The first grew up sedate and calm. The second had surgery to loosen his hamstrings so he didn't walk on his toes all the time. Personalities develop around physical dispositions.
Identical twins have identical DNA.(It is my guess that those functionless genes could be very different in an identical twins. Right? sfs. )
Identical twins have identical DNA.
The idea of genes is changing. The central dogma of biology has been shown to be false (even though it's been known for decades.) DNA is not the king of development as once thought but the cell (egg) itself plays a big role. (in another words DNA alone is not what makes us human) Physiology and the revolution in Evolutionary Biology | Voices From OxfordThanks. My stupidity (no wonder sfs ignored me ).
So genes, functional or functionless, are subsets of DNA.
I could not let those genes that do not show explicit functions go way. I think they do HAVE some critical functions that are not known to us. There are so many of them. How do we know some of them are not "talking" to each other and controls some functions we could not explain so far? How about the personality?
Could genes communicate to each other and perform some kind of biological function that is not given by each individual gene?
The idea of genes is changing. The central dogma of biology has been shown to be false (even though it's been known for decades.) DNA is not the king of development as once thought but the cell (egg) itself plays a big role. (in another words DNA alone is not what makes us human) Physiology and the revolution in Evolutionary Biology | Voices From Oxford
True.The idea of genes is changing.
Watson's version has been known to be false since around 1970. Crick's version seems still to be true. (Crick's explanation for why he used the word "dogma" for something that was clearly speculative was pretty good: he didn't know what the word meant.)The central dogma of biology has been shown to be false (even though it's been known for decades.)
I haven't heard this talk (and am not going to take the time to listen to it), but some of what Noble says is a little over the time, while much of it is only revolutionary to advocates of extreme gene-centric, single-level-of-selection evolution, i.e. pretty much Richard Dawkins. Current evolutionary theory is more nuanced and comprehensive than that.DNA is not the king of development as once thought but the cell (egg) itself plays a big role. (in another words DNA alone is not what makes us human) Physiology and the revolution in Evolutionary Biology | Voices From Oxford
Even better example was those two women with attached head who shared around 70-80% of the brain yet had two complete different personalities. Some of their personality did arise from the situation they were in as one twin will be stronger than the other. I remember scientist questioned how two people basically shared the same brain but had totally different taste in music, etc.(one like to drink while the other didn't) Exactly where is the "personality" coming from if not from the brain? I believe these at least hints the personality is not just the product of the brain let along of genetics and environment.OK.
If so, what is your idea about the origin of personality?
(again, I think identical twins are excellent subject of study. Thanks God to give us such wonderful samples)
Even better example was those two women with attached head who shared around 70-80% of the brain yet had two complete different personalities. Some of their personality did arise from the situation they were in as one twin will be stronger than the other. I remember scientist questioned how two people basically shared the same brain but had totally different taste in music, etc.(one like to drink while the other didn't) Exactly where is the "personality" coming from if not from the brain? I believe these at least hints the personality is not just the product of the brain let along of genetics and environment.
Details, please. I'm not aware of such a case.Even better example was those two women with attached head who shared around 70-80% of the brain yet had two complete different personalities. Some of their personality did arise from the situation they were in as one twin will be stronger than the other. I remember scientist questioned how two people basically shared the same brain but had totally different taste in music, etc.(one like to drink while the other didn't) Exactly where is the "personality" coming from if not from the brain? I believe these at least hints the personality is not just the product of the brain let along of genetics and environment.
In another words the same as brain damage. When someone has brain damage we often refer to that person as "not being himself". I'm sure if someone cut off my arms would have an effect on my person let along my brain.Details, please. I'm not aware of such a case.
What I do know something about are "split-brain" individuals, who have had their corpus callosum severed.
In another words the same as brain damage. When someone has brain damage we often refer to that person as "not being himself". I'm sure if someone cut off my arms would have an effect on my person let along my brain.
What about the little girl who had the left side of her brain completely removed yet her memory (except the motor and speech skills which had to be relearned) and personality was fully intact. Again any brain damage (as well as drugs) can effect the person just like any damage on a DVD could effect the movie yet the data written on the DVD is not a product of the DVD itself.
As for the case I'm referring to it was on a TV ... maybe on Nova but not sure. It's been a few years ago.