The Myth of evolution

[Tomk80]

Whether or not a mutation or a particular allele is benifical or not is entirely dependent on the environment the individual or population happens to be in.

What the heck is a "wildtype mutation?" How is such a mutation different from sickle-cell anemia? How about a little discernment from you, Mark?

I don't know. I've searched for the term and couldn't find it. I think Mark is mixing up terms here. A wild type is the orginal stock of alleles in a population. A mutation then creates a mutant. Best I can say is that a 'wild type mutation' is, well, a mutation of the original wild type, which makes the terms mutation and 'wild type mutation' synonymous. But maybe Mark can clarify himself.

 

[Split Rock]

For a couple of weeks I have fielded these kind of objections and there seems to be a lack of discernment between genetic misinformation and wild type mutations.

I agree, but that is because you are making up terminology. Please explain the difference between "genetic misinformation" and "wild type mutations." Usually in genetics a mutant is compared to the "wildtype." Therefore, it seems to be a contradiction to talk about a "wild type mutation."

 

[Tomk80]

Mark you kmow your doing a good job when evolutionist throw out statements like that. he should of just said ye well whatever. Mark why do they use diseases to show evolution like sickle cell.

Sickle cell shows the working of natural selection. It shows that whether or not a mutation is beneficial is dependent on the environment in which this mutation occurs. In regions were malaria occurs, the mutation is beneficial for those who inherit one allele that has it and another that doesn't, while having both alleles means death. In regions were it doesn't, the mutation has no effect and is completely detrimental. Hence, it hardly occurs there.

So the sickle cell example shows us two things. The first is that whether a mutation is beneficial or not depends on the environment. The second is that if a mutation is not beneficial, it will be weeded out of the population by natural selection.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

For a couple of weeks I have fielded these kind of objections and there seems to be a lack of discernment between genetic misinformation and wild type mutations.

That is the result of random variations through independant assortment and I have discussed this at length. When we can discern the difference between genetic misinformation, effects the alter Medelian ratios we might be ablt to make sense of all of this.

Quite frankly, I think you are confused about terminology.

What is "genetic misinformation"? What is a "wild type mutation"?

I think you need to get your terms and processes straight, because you aren't making much sense.

A wild type mutation does not alter the DNA it just rearranges the existing gene pool.

A "wild type" is a base gene with which other "mutant" versions of that gene (alleles) are compared to. Case in point, the example of the mutated CCR5 gene I gave you a couple weeks ago. A mutation deleted 32 base pairs and produced a varient of that gene, CCR5d32. This isn't merely re-arranging the existing gene pool. This is the production of a varient on an existing gene.

The CCR5 gene is the "wild type". The CCR5d32 is the "mutant".

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Btw, here's another example of a novel gene evolving: http://www.oeb.harvard.edu/hartl/lab/research/function.html

 

[mark kennedy]

After Mendel's discovery, other scientists (such as Hugo de Vries and Karl Correns) rediscovered them in the 1900's, and named the laws they extracted Mendel's laws in honor of him. However, what was also observed was that during these experiments to test Mendel's laws, new traits spontaneously arose, and subsequently transmitted to the offspring. If there was no selection for or against the traits, these new traits now followed the same Mendelian patterns, only where there were first for example 2 alleles, there were now three. I do not know which kind of mutations these were, but they certainly disrupted the ratios (pun intended).

There are things that effect the phenotype like multiple alleles that produce variants of a phenotype and result in rabbit coat color but they can also result in cystic fibrosis. Lethal alleles can result in spontaneous abortions. Phenocopy results in infection and environmentally caused birth defects and there are others. Now the wild type mutations are a result not of mutations in the sense of the genetic code somehow being altered but existing alleles being recombined.

“Most of his research involved crossbreeding experiments on the evening primrose (Oenothera lamarckiana). Later it was shown that the "species" was a hybrid and the dramatic "mutations" were due to recombination of existing alleles (although many true mutations were found soon afterwards by other workers studying such organisms as rats and Drosophila flies).”

http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/~alroy/lefa/deVries.html

So, in the cases when a new allele came into existence, Mendel's laws did not hold true, and this is observed in nature as well as in experiments. Mendel's law, just as any other law, only holds perfectly true when very specific conditions are met. Mendel's law, just as any other law in science, is a descriptive approximation of reality, not a perfect description of reality.

Unless you are talking about fruit flies I don’t really know what you are referring. I do know that there are exceptions to Mendel’s law but you would have to fill me in on how these are all together new alleles rather then recombinations of already existing ones.

 

[mark kennedy]

I agree, but that is because you are making up terminology. Please explain the difference between "genetic misinformation" and "wild type mutations." Usually in genetics a mutant is compared to the "wildtype." Therefore, it seems to be a contradiction to talk about a "wild type mutation."

Genetic misinformation is a reference to mutaions in the somatic cells or sex cells. They include germinal, sominic, point missense, nonsense and frameshift. The big difference between the ones list is that they are most often of no effect at all, harmfull and only in rare instances benefical. Now they are all inheritable effects on the phenotype but the wild type is the most common one and guess what? Wild types are recombinations of exising alleles and while they are called mutations they genetic code in not changed, just rearranged.

 

[Split Rock]

Genetic misinformation is a reference to mutaions in the somatic cells or sex cells. They include germinal, sominic, point missense, nonsense and frameshift. The big difference between the ones list is that they are most often of no effect at all, harmfull and only in rare instances benefical.

Only mutations in the DNA of germ cells (i.e. egg and sperm) are inherited. Where did you get the idea these were "genetic misinformation?"

Now they are all inheritable effects on the phenotype but the wild type is the most common one and guess what? Wild types are recombinations of exising alleles and while they are called mutations they genetic code in not changed, just rearranged.

Recombination is NOT mutation. It is, however, a source of variation (although it is limited).

 

[mark kennedy]

Only mutations in the DNA of germ cells (i.e. egg and sperm) are inherited. Where did you get the idea these were "genetic misinformation?"

I got the information from reading about mutations in somatic cells that are often defined as genetic misinformation but I am a little tired of quoting the sources only to have them ignored or dismissed.

Recombination is NOT mutation. It is, however, a source of variation (although it is limited).

Yes a wild type expression is considered a mutation of the gene sequence. Even though it is just a recombination it was thought to be an altering of the genes but because it resulted in a mutated phenotype. What was discovered was that it was just a recombination of existing alleles and I have made this point a number of different ways.

 

[Tomk80]

Genetic misinformation is a reference to mutaions in the somatic cells or sex cells. They include germinal, sominic, point missense, nonsense and frameshift. The big difference between the ones list is that they are most often of no effect at all, harmfull and only in rare instances benefical. Now they are all inheritable effects on the phenotype but the wild type is the most common one and guess what? Wild types are recombinations of exising alleles and while they are called mutations they genetic code in not changed, just rearranged.

So genetic misinformatio=mutation. Glad we cleared that one.

Now, the second sentence is a weird sentence because you seem to be conflating two things. Germinal and 'sominic' (I take it you mean somatic) seems to refer to the cells where the mutation occurs. Missense, nonsense and frameshift are a few of the possible types of mutations.

And with 'wild type mutation' you seem to be referring to recombination where the alleles do not change. It would be my advise to speak of recombination in that case, since that is what you are talking about and is clearer in its terminology.

 

[mark kennedy]

So genetic misinformatio=mutation. Glad we cleared that one.

Now, the second sentence is a weird sentence because you seem to be conflating two things. Germinal and 'sominic' (I take it you mean somatic) seems to refer to the cells where the mutation occurs. Missense, nonsense and frameshift are a few of the possible types of mutations.

And with 'wild type mutation' you seem to be referring to recombination where the alleles do not change. It would be my advise to speak of recombination in that case, since that is what you are talking about and is clearer in its terminology.

While I do hope that we are getting this clear I would like to try to a finer point on it. A wild type mutation is actually a recombination of existing alleles while the genetic misinformation of somatic and germline mutations actually alter the genetic code. I just think its important to make that distinction since the term mutation has come to include a lot of different things. Make no mistake this is about the differences between single common ancestory and the implications of the Genesis account for evolutionary biology.

 

[Ondoher]

While I do hope that we are getting this clear I would like to try to a finer point on it. A wild type mutation is actually a recombination of existing alleles while the genetic misinformation of somatic and germline mutations actually alter the genetic code.

"Wild type mutation" appears to be a term you have invented. Recombination of alleles is not considered mutational. Mutations change DNA. Evolution only cares about mutations in germ cells.

I just think its important to make that distinction since the term mutation has come to include a lot of different things.

Not really, no. Mutations are changes to DNA.

Make no mistake this is about the differences between single common ancestory and the implications of the Genesis account for evolutionary biology.

Common ancestry has been demonstrated to such an extent that it is frequently referred to as the fact of evolution. The modern synthesis, which includes mutations and natural selection amongst the mechanisms, explains the mechanisms behind common ancestry.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

While I do hope that we are getting this clear I would like to try to a finer point on it. A wild type mutation is actually a recombination of existing alleles while the genetic misinformation of somatic and germline mutations actually alter the genetic code.

If you are talking about recombination, then just say recombination. "Wild type mutation" sounds like you are talking about the mutation of a wild type (i.e. "original") gene.

I just think its important to make that distinction since the term mutation has come to include a lot of different things.

There are indeed different types of mutations. Therefore, I recommend using appropriate terminology. To that effect, here are a list of mutation types. And here is a broader Genetics Glossary.

 

[yossarian]

Genetic misinformation is a reference to mutaions in the somatic cells or sex cells. They include germinal, sominic, point missense, nonsense and frameshift. The big difference between the ones list is that they are most often of no effect at all, harmfull and only in rare instances benefical. Now they are all inheritable effects on the phenotype but the wild type is the most common one and guess what? Wild types are recombinations of exising alleles and while they are called mutations they genetic code in not changed, just rearranged.

after reading all that all I can do is recommend that you get this textbook and read it from the start.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/076370489X/103-6189697-8743860?v=glance

 

[mark kennedy]

"Wild type mutation" appears to be a term you have invented.

"wild-type (wt) - the 'normal' allele, the allele found in the majority of a wild population. Usually the normally-functioning allele, and often (but not always) the dominant allele. For example: for a soil bacterium, the wild-type organism can make all the amino acids it needs for survival; for human beings, the wild-type allele for skin pigmentation results in the production of some melanin pigment."

Genetics 1

I am not dignifying the rest of this...post with a response.

 

[yossarian]

"wild-type (wt) - the 'normal' allele, the allele found in the majority of a wild population. Usually the normally-functioning allele, and often (but not always) the dominant allele. For example: for a soil bacterium, the wild-type organism can make all the amino acids it needs for survival; for human beings, the wild-type allele for skin pigmentation results in the production of some melanin pigment."

Genetics 1

I am not dignifying the rest of this...post with a response.

and did you find the word "mutation" in there anywhere? or any reference at all to mutation?

nobody talks about "wild-type mutations" because the idea is incoherent

 

[mark kennedy]

after reading all that all I can do is recommend that you get this textbook and read it from the start.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/076370489X/103-6189697-8743860?v=glance

Life 4th edition McGraw Hill Publications

I got that from a Biology textbook in Chapter 13, Genetics and Biotechnology, section 13:4 Mutation-Genetic Misinformation Table 13.6 reads as follows.


Types of mutations

A sentence of three-letter words can serve as an analogy to demonstrate the effects of mutations on gene sequence:

Wild type- THE ONE BIG FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
Missense- THQ ONE BIG FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
Nonsense- THE ONE BIG
Frameshift- THE ONEQBI GFI YHA DON ERE DEY
Deletion of 3 letters- THE ONE BIG HAD ONE RED EYE
Duplication- THE ONE BIG FLY FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
Insertion- THE ONE BIG WER FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
Expanding mutation-
P1 THE ONE BIG FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
F1 THE ONE BIG FLY FLY FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
F2 THE ONE BIG FLY FLY FLY FLY FLY HAD ONE RED EYE.

That has got to be the 4th time I have typed this in today...goodnight all.

 

[yossarian]

after reading all that all I can do is recommend that you get this textbook and read it from the start.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...743860?v=glance




Life 4th edition McGraw Hill Publications

I got that from a Biology textbook in Chapter 13, Genetics and Biotechnology, section 13:4 Mutation-Genetic Misinformation Table 13.6 reads as follows.


Types of mutations

A sentence of three-letter words can serve as an analogy to demonstrate the effects of mutations on gene sequence:

Wild type- THE ONE BIG FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
Missense- THQ ONE BIG FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
Nonsense- THE ONE BIG
Frameshift- THE ONEQBI GFI YHA DON ERE DEY
Deletion of 3 letters- THE ONE BIG HAD ONE RED EYE
Duplication- THE ONE BIG FLY FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
Insertion- THE ONE BIG WER FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
Expanding mutation-
P1 THE ONE BIG FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
F1 THE ONE BIG FLY FLY FLY HAD ONE RED EYE
F2 THE ONE BIG FLY FLY FLY FLY FLY HAD ONE RED EYE.

That has got to be the 4th time I have typed this in today...goodnight all.

the wild-type is not a type of mutation - its the template that is being mutated

 

[mark kennedy]

and did you find the word "mutation" in there anywhere? or any reference at all to mutation?

nobody talks about "wild-type mutations" because the idea is incoherent

Yes yossarian they do...I am begining to wonder after over a thousand posts to the forum if I am just wasting my time.

 

[Pete Harcoff]

Types of mutations

A sentence of three-letter words can serve as an analogy to demonstrate the effects of mutations on gene sequence:

Wild type- THE ONE BIG FLY HAD ONE RED EYE

I think this is where the confusion arose. The "wild type" is not a type of mutation. It's the "original" version of the gene (or sentence in this case).