Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Rapid Emergence
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Loudmouth" data-source="post: 68370663" data-attributes="member: 11790"><p>Then we are probably looking at about 10% of each genome for the apes (including humans). There are still DNA binding motifs, histone binding regions, transcription factors, RNA genes, and other features that are not made up of codons, nor are they translated into proteins.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Those are different categories. Synonymous and non-synonymous refer to the amino acid sequence of the protein. If a mutation does not change the amino acid sequence, then it is a synonymous mutation (i.e. it means the same thing). Some substitutions will be synonymous mutations, and all indels (i.e. gains/losses) will be non-synonymous.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Depends on what you are talking about. If you are talking about purely DNA sequence, then any difference in the genome can be used. If you are talking about phenotypic differences, then probably not. Most scientists consider the vast majority of synonymous mutations to be incapable of changing the phenotype of the carrier.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>If we had enough DNA data, there could be.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Mutations found in one species but not in another are considered a way of identifying one population from another. These are most often differences that exist in a large percentage of the population.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Not sure where you have the branches, or if you have any branches at all. Also, I don't know what those letters are supposed to represent.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Loudmouth, post: 68370663, member: 11790"] Then we are probably looking at about 10% of each genome for the apes (including humans). There are still DNA binding motifs, histone binding regions, transcription factors, RNA genes, and other features that are not made up of codons, nor are they translated into proteins. Those are different categories. Synonymous and non-synonymous refer to the amino acid sequence of the protein. If a mutation does not change the amino acid sequence, then it is a synonymous mutation (i.e. it means the same thing). Some substitutions will be synonymous mutations, and all indels (i.e. gains/losses) will be non-synonymous. Depends on what you are talking about. If you are talking about purely DNA sequence, then any difference in the genome can be used. If you are talking about phenotypic differences, then probably not. Most scientists consider the vast majority of synonymous mutations to be incapable of changing the phenotype of the carrier. If we had enough DNA data, there could be. Mutations found in one species but not in another are considered a way of identifying one population from another. These are most often differences that exist in a large percentage of the population. Not sure where you have the branches, or if you have any branches at all. Also, I don't know what those letters are supposed to represent. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Rapid Emergence
Top
Bottom