Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: xm177e2
"If the cost of keeping the code around is extremely low, then it probably won't get selected out any time soon."

If we have a fast-changing bacteria, say 100 alleged "mutational events" per day, would 4 billion years be long enough to see some unused code get filtered out?

96 posted on 02/07/2005 9:09:12 PM PST by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]


To: Southack

We have a bug problem here.

As I mentioned earlier, it is possible for extra DNA to be a drain on a bug, in certain high risk and tricky environments. However, in a vast majority of cases that extra energy would not be a factor in survival.

However, in lab bugs it won't happen since there is no competition, just plenty of food and great growing conditions.


99 posted on 02/07/2005 9:16:06 PM PST by furball4paws ("These are Microbes."... "You have crobes?" BC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]

To: Southack; xm177e2
If we have a fast-changing bacteria, say 100 alleged "mutational events" per day, would 4 billion years be long enough to see some unused code get filtered out?

Probably not, no, since organisms have more of a vested interest in making sure they faithfully copy their DNA (which necessitates accurately copying even the "fluff", since it can't "tell" the difference), than they do in error-prone "snippage" which under most circumstances provides a very negligible advantage.

In short, the risks of "losing" parts of the DNA outweigh the possible benefits, so organisms have an evolutionary incentive to maximize their reliable DNA preservation and copying (even when that includes copying garbage as well as the critical genes).

Short form: Yeah, there may be a *slight* evolutionary pressure to "clean" the genome, but there are *other*, *stronger* evolutionary pressures to leave a working genome alone and intact as much as possible.

Furthermore, while some junk DNA will (and does) drop out by "lucky" random mutation, more keeps getting made via other random mutation, so there will be no long-term trend towards "genome cleaning".

101 posted on 02/07/2005 9:23:27 PM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]

To: Southack
If we have a fast-changing bacteria, say 100 alleged "mutational events" per day, would 4 billion years be long enough to see some unused code get filtered out?

If the code really is completely unused, and the genetics are rapidly changing, you might expect it to get lost in the shuffle, yes. But DNA that isn't out-and-out harmful is hard to get rid of, and there's always some new "junk DNA" to take the place of the old stuff. Junk DNA just doesn't put a high enough cost on the cell for it to be selected out quickly. At least, that's one possible explanation. I haven't studied it, so I couldn't tell you for sure.

There are more ways for junk DNA to get into a cell than for it to be lost. For instance, some viruses will pick up other bacterial DNA instead of virus DNA by accident before leaving a host cell; when they attach to some other cell, instead of infecting it with viral DNA, they add in part of the DNA from the cell they just left. There's all sorts of crazy ways for bacteria to pick up junk DNA (or useful DNA).

103 posted on 02/07/2005 9:26:20 PM PST by xm177e2 (Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson