Mutationist Idea

[foodchain]

Is there any study on the possibility of the mutationist hypothesis as a possible evolutionary mechanism at the developmental level, sort of a norm of reaction type of effect in which hotspots for mutation may develop from say selective pressures?

 

Basically sort of a signaling process is what I am thinking about possibly, operating somewhat like any other biochemical process at a epistatic level. I mean recombination is a powerful thing really, I just wonder exactly its potentials. Metabolism alone seems to suggest how fine selective pressures can be, so does convergent evolution. So I am wondering if what brings about the mutationist perspective is maybe a product of evolution at a developmental level possibly via plasticity as part of a norm of reaction maybe.

 

Don’t get confused as to my position on NS. I am not saying adaptation directly embodies ultimate fitness for an environment, just that it does define itself prominently in adaptation period.

[thedarkshade]

Is there any study on the possibility of the mutationist hypothesis as a possible evolutionary mechanism at the developmental level, sort of a norm of reaction type of effect in which hotspots for mutation may develop from say selective pressures?

I found it a bit weird when I heard of mutations as an evolution mechanism, for a simple reason. Mutations are always harmful or silenced (when a misplaced codon recognizes the same aminoacid as the codon it replaced). I have not heard of any positive mutation so far, which by replacing codons accidentally caused a better development of any part of the organism.

 

It's like an earthquake happens in a city, and expecting from that earthquake to have positive effects on the city.

 

If there is any explanation of how organisms evolved by mutations, then I'd honestly like to see/read it.

[foodchain]

I found it a bit weird when I heard of mutations as an evolution mechanism, for a simple reason. Mutations are always harmful or silenced (when a misplaced codon recognizes the same aminoacid as the codon it replaced). I have not heard of any positive mutation so far, which by replacing codons accidentally caused a better development of any part of the organism.

 

It's like an earthquake happens in a city, and expecting from that earthquake to have positive effects on the city.

 

If there is any explanation of how organisms evolved by mutations, then I'd honestly like to see/read it.

 

I would just point out genetic diversity and say look at the positive reality of it. You carry all kinds of mutations or changes to genetic code, in fact its pretty much different individual to individual. A real simple view of mutation in effect is in microbial life. Just read on microbial evolution and microbial mutation. They are also one of the more simple organisms for say a study of forced evolution in a laboratory setting using mutation, in which via mutation the microbe population survives a decreasing level of fitness in a host environment.

 

One human mutation I like to use for example is a mutation in populations in Europe in particular due to life histories. Some individuals house a mutation making them immune to the aids virus. I believe it involves some kind of a receptor on a cell surface.

[thedarkshade]

But genetic diversity is not due to mutations. It's due to the extremely high number of possibilities for nitrogen pairs to be arranged. If a gene contains 1000 bases, the possible combination is [math]4^{1000}[/math], bigger than the number of atoms in the universe. This is why out there the scale of biodiversity is so high, not due to mutations.

 

Typical Mutation! In the synthesis of red blood cells instead of GAG adenine is replaced with thymine giving GTG, and red blood cells have hook shapes, unable to bond enough oxygen. Mutations kill!

[foodchain]

But genetic diversity is not due to mutations. It's due to the extremely high number of possibilities for nitrogen pairs to be arranged. If a gene contains 1000 bases, the possible combination is [math]4^{1000}[/math], bigger than the number of atoms in the universe. This is why out there the scale of biodiversity is so high, not due to mutations.

 

Typical Mutation! In the synthesis of red blood cells instead of GAG adenine is replaced with thymine giving GTG, and red blood cells have hook shapes, unable to bond enough oxygen. Mutations kill!

 

Not all of diversity is due to recombination, its simply not true. You carry a common mutation from primate history in which your internal ability to produce vitamin directly was affected, this mutation did not kill. Its a common misperception that mutations are only lethal, its simply not true and basic education in biology reveals this. Also as you would put it I would find recombination holding just as lethal a possibility in all reality, yet it does not always lead to such.

 

Was it not a mutation that allowed for a primates skull to grow larger by changing the physiology of its muscular/skeletal structure more so with the top of the skull and that mass of muscle for chewing? It was directly related to the jaw and common diet.

 

Mutation is a common reality of life and evolution, its not always fatal, sometimes it has a null effect even.

[thedarkshade]

Mutation is a common reality of life and evolution, its not always fatal, sometimes it has a null effect even.

Indeed it does have null effect. We call that as 'silenced' mutation. It happens when a codon accidentally replaces another, but it also recognizes the same aminoacid as the former one does.

 

But if we calculated what is the percentage of 'bad' mutations and what is the percentage of positive mutations, I believe the number would change in for bad ones. This is why the term 'mutation' has become a synonym to negative effect!

[foodchain]

Indeed it does have null effect. We call that as 'silenced' mutation. It happens when a codon accidentally replaces another, but it also recognizes the same aminoacid as the former one does.

 

But if we calculated what is the percentage of 'bad' mutations and what is the percentage of positive mutations, I believe the number would change in for bad ones. This is why the term 'mutation' has become a synonym to negative effect!

 

Interesting effects. I made a thread about seed physiology months ago which got zero for replies. Look at it from an energetics point of view I wonder how much they simple "geometry" of seed physiology comes into play with function, like its structure. If you were to model its environmental physiology in terms of potentials do you think it would offer any valuable data? Such as a couple groups of seeds being exposed to familiar or required conditions yet changing soil moisture levels and direct soil contact to seed surface? I think it would be interesting if you could tag and trace large molecular complexes in terms change over time under such conditions. I just wonder if it would hold any serious impact on occurrence and placement of mutations if such holds any kind of developmental impact.

[Daecon]

A combination of Lamarckian and Darwinian evolutionary processes?

[foodchain]

A combination of Lamarckian and Darwinian evolutionary processes?

 

No.

 

Basically in my idea if you subtract natural selection from evolution I don’t think anything makes sense. So from DNA to concepts like environmental physiology how does natural selection actually apply pressure? Say any multicellular organism or unicellular. I think unicellular provides a basic insight for how multicellular lifeforms survive as a total organism and of course from studies on such which bring about physical data like sugar phosphate backbones and what not to make things short. So from the success of physical science in biology I wonder how much of natural selection can be defined on such a small level, such as cellular molecular for instance. For instance can natural selection tend to favor the probability of mutation in certain places or rate of mutation to certain genes?

 

I know the general idea is one of reproduction in time favoring traits in units or unit traits or what not from a fitness landscape, but with the concept of epigenetic networks for example and norm of reaction for another how well is natural selection wired into the smallest aspects of biology? Can disturbances in such lead to developmental issues? I would think so rather easily but in how many forms? Basically maybe you could trace selective pressure and map such. I think if that could be understood I think it would have huge applications, a person could learn exactly what behaviors to dodge to avoid triggering some gene or genes to become active or inactive possibly to concepts in biological engineering for another, I think it would also greatly enhance ability to understand environmental impact really.