backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 217 comment(s) - last by mircea.. on Jun 26 at 11:34 AM

Scientist correct evolutionary theory, showcase flexibility of evolution science

While many lines of criticism have been leveled against evolution theory over the years, one of the most ironic reoccurring criticisms focuses in one of its greatest strengths -- flexibility.  Frequently the theory is alternatively blasted for being too rigid and an incomplete picture and then later for changing and revising. 

Flexibility is a key strength of evolution theory.  DailyTech recently chronicled a major evolution observed by American researchers, believed to be the first of its magnitude to be observed.  Now evolutionary biologists have made critical steps in revising the genetic side of evolutionary theory to help explain one of the most daunting questions of evolutionary history -- how prehistoric fish evolved over hundreds of millions of years into amphibians, then reptiles, and finally mammals, and eventually how apes evolved into humans.

European Molecular Biology Laboratory's European Bioinformatics Institute [EMBL-EBI] researchers have discovered and fixed critical errors in genetic comparisons between species.  Genetic comparisons are frequently used to draw evolutionary conclusions about heredity and common ancestors.  However, according to the EMBL-EBI researchers, these methods have been suffering silently under systematic errors.

Their findings are detailed in the journal Science this month.  They don't just point out the problem either -- they provide a solution.  The researchers have developed a computational tool which avoids the errors and offers key insight into how DNA and protein sequences have evolved over time.

The results suggest that sequence turnover, thought to be a key component of major evolutions, is discovered to be much more common than previously thought.  Nick Goldman, group leader at EMBL-EBI explains that while evolution may be occurring faster, it still occurs at a maddeningly slow pace by human standards.

Says Goldman, "Evolution is happening so slowly that we cannot study it by simply watching it. That's why we learn about the relationships between species and the course and mechanism of evolution by comparing genetic sequences."

Evolution is driven by changes in living organisms' DNA.  DNA code consists of sets of four "letter" bases, which code a sequence for a specific amino acid.  Mutation and thus evolution can occur when the DNA gets "messed up" during copying with individual or several letters incorrectly copied [substitution], lost [deletion] or gained [insertion].

The rather complex error is explained well in the researchers’ publications.  They detail genetic comparison and how they go awry, stating:

A comparison of multiple sequences starts with their alignment. Characters in different sequences that share common ancestry are matched and gains and losses of characters are marked as gaps. Since this procedure is computationally heavy, multiple alignments are often built progressively from several pairwise alignments. It is impossible, however, to judge if a length difference between two sequences is a deletion in one or an insertion in the other sequence. For correct alignment of multiple sequences, distinguishing between these two events is crucial. Existing methods, that fail to do that, lead to a flawed understanding of the course of evolution.

Ari Löytynoja, who developed the tool to correct these errors, states, "Our new method gets around these errors by taking into account what we already know about evolutionary relationships.  Say we are comparing the DNA of human and chimp and can't tell if a deletion or an insertion happened. To solve this, our tool automatically invokes information about the corresponding sequences in closely related species, such as gorilla or macaque. If they show the same gap as the chimp, this suggests an insertion in humans."

Researchers have thus discovered that insertions are much more prevalent than previously believed, while deletions are less common than previously believed.

The researchers believe that the errors came from adapting protein recognition tools to genetics, which is broader in scope.  They believe that for this reason, additional errors in current computational methods are likely to be found.  Fortunately for evolutionary theory, it has the flexibility to correct these errors, and some of the world's brightest minds to help with the corrections.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

So...
By jadeskye on 6/24/2008 9:00:08 AM , Rating: 4
So are we the production of retarded fish frogs?




RE: So...
By BMFPitt on 6/24/08, Rating: 0
RE: So...
By TSS on 6/24/2008 9:13:06 AM , Rating: 4
actually since the internet was invented it seems where slowly evolving towards retarded fish frog gay monkeys, instead of beeing the result of them.


RE: So...
By Nyamekye on 6/24/08, Rating: 0
RE: So...
By Spyvie on 6/24/2008 11:36:27 AM , Rating: 2
Hey! My mother was an aquatic simian with a learning disability!


RE: So...
By FaceMaster on 6/24/2008 7:39:58 PM , Rating: 3
Your Mum's evidence that occasionally evolution takes a step backwards.


RE: So...
By phxfreddy on 6/24/2008 10:46:40 PM , Rating: 2
I am athiest. But I do find it ironic that while liberals believe in evolution it is considered politically incorrect to state the obvious that there is difference in intelligence levels between the races.

I guess its only ok to screw with the rights religion. But you dast not fudge with the lefts.


RE: So...
By OrSin on 6/25/2008 11:57:12 AM , Rating: 2
Tha that is becuase thier is no difference level in intellence between the races. Almost all studies show, that in the same envirnoment the races show a very similar levels. The problem with many test done in the 60-80, is that they tried to equate enviroments that was fundimentally not equal. It is true that intelligence, just like speed and strenght can be breed. But it is also true that the breeding to increase strength (what was done to slaves) doesn't breed out intelligence. Guess what begin an athiest doesn't make your foolish ideas any better.



RE: So...
By porkpie on 6/25/2008 1:23:05 PM , Rating: 2
I don't take any position on this, but the only studies that don't show an intelligence difference between races are those which apply a huge socioeconomic "correction factor" to get things to balance out.


RE: So...
By DM0407 on 6/24/2008 10:51:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And gay monkeys


Not that there is anything wrong with that...


RE: So...
By DM0407 on 6/24/2008 10:51:52 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And gay monkeys


Not that there is anything wrong with that...


RE: So...
By Lightnix on 6/24/2008 9:46:01 AM , Rating: 5
The human race, too smart to be an ape, too good to be a fish. Look at us, the poor creatures that we are, subjected to the possibility that we might have come from something lesser than the impossible.


RE: So...
By Phlargo on 6/24/2008 11:41:39 AM , Rating: 5
How come this was rated down - it's pretty clever. We are a very proud species and we like to distance ourselves from things that don't feel like we want to be related or involved.

Just think of how long it's been since I called my Aunt Martha... case in point ;-)

I think the acknowledgment of being 'only human' is perfect here - we are the product of immense changes over a long time. To me that sounds far more possible than, as Lightnix put it, the impossible (or at least ridiculously improbable).

Science is science - how could evolution be anything more than a theory and how can people complain about it so much? We're not looking for truth - we accept we can't know the truth - we identify models which don't work and we get rid of them and we modify those that come close to make them closer.


RE: So...
By JonnyDough on 6/25/2008 11:47:18 AM , Rating: 2
What's interesting is that both evolutionists and creationists often fail to examine human nature when it comes to the idea of the evolution of our species.

Simply put, even today we kill those different from ourselves using ethnocentric views and racism as driving forces. It is not so wild to imagine that man-like apes were regarded as lowly, or perceived as a sort of sub-par threat to the "more evolved" societies and species of man.

As such, being human nature what it is, these "man-like apes" would have probably been killed by those "better" than them. The same principle is what drove slavery here in America not too long ago, and continues in the minds of those enlisted with the KKK and other racist organizations.

The idea of diversity is that each person or even group of people have certain strengths and qualities that are sometimes lacking in others.

It is impossible to draw conclusions that an entire race of people is sub-par when there are individuals in any racial group that excel and exceed our own personal selves in any number of areas.

This is why many argue that racism is a selfish idea that only serves to show the ignorance of a person, with a lack of understanding of others and themselves.

What's interesting as mentioned earlier in my post, however, is that racism and prejudices have likely had a large part in our evolution through a natural human process of genocide. I say natural, because virtually anything mankind does should be considered natural, as we are derived and a part of nature.


RE: So...
By stirfry213 on 6/24/2008 12:24:07 PM , Rating: 5
Manbearpig... the ultimate proof of evolution!


RE: So...
By someguy743 on 6/24/2008 5:09:51 PM , Rating: 1
We evolved from primordial pond scum that got struck by lightning. The electricity booted up the DNA in the pond scum kind of like in Frankenstein movies. Once these protein amino acids with DNA booted up, we became tiny one celled bacteria or something.

From there, the DNA just sort of tweaked and optimized itself into something new which made the organism survive better. The surviving organisms had sex to create slightly "new and improved" offspring. Then, basically the process repeated over and over for millions and millions of years. Little tweaks to DNA code like computer code over VERY long periods of time to get us to where we are today. Supposedly, us humans are the pinnacle of all that DNA programming. We're the most organism with the most advanced software :) If you see pictures of a fetus develop in the womb, it looks like the progression of millions of years evolution over a period of 9 months. It's weird.

Just like all the other animals on the planet, we still have billions if not trillions of bacteria in us to this day ... good and bad bacteria. We have lots of "critters" running around in our bodies actually ... most of them are supposed to be there by design. The immune system is like a coordinated army patrol like the Borg in Star Trek or something except they are the good guys out to kill invading bacteria and viruses, etc. Amazing thing the immune system. We'd be toast without it. Kind of like running your computer without a firewall and anti-virus software. Your body would crash before long. Blue screen of death. :)


RE: So...
By masher2 (blog) on 6/24/2008 7:10:54 PM , Rating: 2
> "The immune system is like a coordinated army patrol like the Borg in Star Trek or something except they are the good guys out to kill invading bacteria and viruses, etc. Amazing thing the immune system"

What's even more amazing is that, at any one time, there are far more foreign cells living in our body than those which belong to us....most of them within our gut.


RE: So...
By JonnyDough on 6/25/2008 11:53:04 AM , Rating: 2
If you've ever studied reef coral and many ocean invertebrates you will have probably noted that some creatures are actually more than one creature living in symbiosis, much as we do with our bacteria.

The thing is, that with some of these sea creatures, it is nearly impossible to distinguish a host from it's symbiotic partne