Image from article.
Posted on 04/24/2013 8:27:32 AM PDT by fishtank
Plant Epigenome Research Negates Evolution by Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D. *
Plants make ideal systems for studying the underlying biological processes that confer their ability to adapt in different environments. Several new studies show how plants do this without changing their genetic code through a process known as "epigenetics"—the chemical tagging and modification of DNA in the genome.1 These results have profound implications in that they negate the gradualistic evolutionary Darwinian paradigm.
Plants cannot uproot themselves and migrate somewhere else as a means to adjust to their environment. They have to respond to their surroundings, essentially, where they are planted. Therefore, they have been ideal biological systems for the study of the mechanisms that underlie adaptation.
In research just published, the DNA of Arabidopsis plants from various locations around the world was tested.1 Arabidopsis is a mustard-like weedy plant that has become the key model system for genetic study in plants. The scientists determined both the differences in genetic (DNA sequence) variability and epigenetic modifications related to the chemical tagging of DNA called methylation.
In other words, the plants were very similar to each other in their genetic code, because they were all the same species, but their epigenomes were quite different in the variety of worldwide environments in which the plants were found. These epigenetic methylation-based tags are directly related to which genes are switched off and on all over the genome.
In an interview reported by the Salk Institute, where the study was coordinated, lead scientist Joseph Ecker stated, "We looked at plants collected from around the world and found that their epigenomes are surprisingly different," and, "This additional diversity may create a way for plants to rapidly adapt to diverse environments without any genetic change in their DNA, which takes a very long time."2
This research has revealed how a previously hidden layer of DNA-based information is directly involved in how a plant interfaces with its environment. This whole scenario presents a number of very serious problems for Darwinian evolution.
First, the methylation of DNA is not a random event—it involves a complex array of molecular machines (proteins and RNAs) that attach the methyl tags according to environmental signals that are placed at specific DNA addresses all over the genome.
Second, complex cellular machinery and infrastructure are needed to interpret the DNA tags—not only according to the environment, but also according to what type of plant cell in which the tags are located. Amazingly, the researchers also discovered that the tagging also varied depending on whether it was a leaf, a pollen cell, or a seed. In other words, not only does the epigenetic tagging vary based on environmental signals, but also by cell type.
Third, for all of this to work as the plant grows and makes seed to reproduce, there needs to be another level in the system to ensure that the chemical DNA tags are accurately copied along with the DNA when it is replicated to produce new cells. This is especially important in the reproductive cells, so that the next generation of plants have the same adaptive system.
Fourth, not only does this highly complex "all or nothing" system have a zero probability of evolving through gradualistic DNA mutations, but it also presents problems for the idea of natural selection acting upon it. If the plant is presenting a system of adaptation that is, to a large extent, insulated from direct selection on so-called positive DNA sequence mutations (an exceptionally rare occurrence), then how can evolution progress?
Supporting this study, is yet another recent report showing how the Arabidopsis plant responds to heat stress through the epigenetic modification of its genome in a complex system that is directed in part, by a wide diversity of RNA molecules.3 Clearly, the precise and timely regulation of environment-responsive gene networks contains yet one more layer of bio complexity that Darwinian evolution cannot account for.
The incredible bioengineering of living systems revealed through the advance of modern science was accurately predicted in the Bible several thousand years ago: "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" (Romans 1:20).
References
Schmitz, R.J. et al. 2013. Patterns of population epigenomic diversity. Nature. 495 (7440): 193-198. Hidden Layer of Genome Unveils How Plants May Adapt to Environments Throughout the World. Salk Institute for Biological Studies - News Release
Popova, O.V. et al. 2013. The RdDM Pathway Is Required for Basal Heat Tolerance in Arabidopsis. Molecular Plant. 6 (2): 396-410.
*Dr. Tomkins is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research and received his Ph.D. in Genetics from Clemson University.
Article posted April 24, 2013.
Image from article.
God put “engineered adaptability” into His creatures.
I remember asking evolutionists how exactly we’ve evolved through so many years, and I’ve never had an answer. What happened to our tails? Why aren’t we so hairy anymore? Things like that, never answered by them.
You have a tail. It’s your coccyx. We don’t swing from trees anymore, so having a tail was not a selective advantage, and over millions of years the now useless appendage atrophied like it did in chimps and gorillas. Our ancestors were savannah apes, and lived in a hot climate, a mutation of less hair gave a selective advantage, so over time we became less hairy.
That answer your deep insight?
Science, indeed, marches on.
I sincerely doubt that the 19th-century biologist Darwin, if asked if it would be impossible, someday, in light of more-refined scientific tools and a greater body of data, to improve upon and perfect his theory, would have answered in the negative.
I pity the theists who take this "revelation" as evidence supporting a belief in any invisible sky friend (Vishnu, Odin, Allah, Yahweh, etc.).
Regards,
Why proteins coded for by DNA. DNA that changes due to natural selection.
Female Lions have an epigenetic signal that blunts the male Lions epigenetic signal to make a massive baby. When you cross a male Lion with a female Tiger that doesn't have the same epigenetic signal - you get a huge Liger. When you cross a male Tiger that doesn't have the signal with a female Lion - you get a stunted Tigon.
Exactly what one would expect if epigenetic signals were involved in evolution. This same pattern emerges in any number of different species; where there is high promiscuity the males want to signal the baby to be large and the females want to blunt that signal - where there is low promiscuity those signals are not there.
Yep= in high school I learned that FERNS are just about the same they were eons ago [millions?]
But the teacher said nothing for my “WHY haven`t they evolved??”
.
Problem is apes have more chromosomes then humans. There is no known cases where plants and animals evolve and lose chromosomes.
You can't use that argument, else you are not qualified to discussed science!!
(sarc)
Turn on the light and what scurries around to escape!?
See how they run!!!
The fact that apes have more chromosomes than Humans is a perfect example of a case of an animal evolving and losing chromosomes. Actually we didn’t lose any, chromosomes 2 and 3 fused and we can see exactly where the fusion happened. It has been mapped. The new chromosome has two centromeres, with one now being inactive and an extra set of telomeres.
When I first heard about DNA, it sounded very much like a computer program. And then, as scientists learned more about how it functions it struck me that DNA was like COBOL and what this article discusses is like JCL.
It’s actually quite fascinating, and the more we know about it, the more it looks like somebody designed it.
In the article the author states that the DNA has not changed. Then how can anyone say evolution has occurred?
“over millions of years the now useless appendage atrophied like it did in chimps and gorillas”
Since you have no evidence of any ancient chimps, gorillas, or humans with tails, you are just assuming they existed, and then assuming they atrophied in response to environmental stimuli which you must also assume caused the atrophy. Another evolutionist “just-so story”.
Because they didn’t have to. That’s how evolution works, it favors that which works. Ferns do a great job filling their niche, no need for further change. Sharks and alligators haven’t changed much either, for the same reason.
A review of the common claim that the human and chimpanzee (chimp) genomes are nearly identical was found to be highly questionable solely by an analysis of the methodology and data outlined in an assortment of key research publications. Reported high DNA sequence similarity estimates are primarily based on prescreened biological samples and/or data. Data too dissimilar to be conveniently aligned was typically omitted, masked and/or not reported. Furthermore, gap data from final alignments was also often discarded, further inflating final similarity estimates. It is these highly selective data-omission processes, driven by Darwinian dogma, that produce the commonly touted 98% similarity figure for human–chimp DNA comparisons. Based on the analysis of data provided in various publications, including the often cited 2005 chimpanzee genome report, it is safe to conclude that human–chimp genome similarity is not more than ~87% identical, and possibly not higher than 81%. These revised estimates are based on relevant data omitted from the final similarity estimates typically presented.
Jeffrey Tomkins and Jerry Bergman
Logic not allowed in evolution/ sarc
many organisms have not “evolved”, actually none in the sense, they evolved from common ancestor.
i.e “evolved” as in ape to human.
or better yet, non-life to life.
Just because an evolutionist says we had a tail, doesn’t mean we did.
Ignore trite answers.
Listen to their (non)answers.
Please don’t bother trying to convince them with facts, they are happy being confused with ignorance.
I have never understood the reason some folks feel there is a conflict between evolution and theology. There isn’t.
Only folks who are literal interpreters of every word of the Bible have issue with the theory of evolution.
The core belief of Theology that God created man is not trumped by evolution, after all, according to first mover theory, change by its very existence is proof of God’s existence.
I see this entire debate as silliness to the Nth degree, its like watching a monty python skit.
The Panthera cats lack a hyoid bone at the back of the tongue, compared to Felis. Acinonyx has the hyoid, but lacks the ability to retract its claws. So the differences between the cats could have arisen through loss of genetic information due to mutations (loss of the bone; loss of claw retraction). Note that this has nothing to do with molecules-to-man evolution, which requires the addition of new information, not loss of information (which is to be expected in a fallen world as things tend to ‘fall apart’).
-Don Batten
“it was the best of times it was the worst of times”
“sit was the best of times it was the worst of times”
itwasthebestoftimesitwastheworstoftimes
sitwasthebestoftimesitwastheworstoftimes
Do the two differ by 100%? Or do they differ by 2.5%?
It depends upon how you want to match them up - or insure that they don’t match up at all.
The fact is that chimpanzees and humans differ in genetic DNA by less than 2%. You can compare all known genes in both genomes and arrive at that figure yourself, the information is public access.
Any analysis, over the entire genome, or just genetic DNA, shows that humans and chimpanzees are closer in DNA than either is to a gorilla.
As far as species go, humans and chimpanzees are quite similar in DNA. A mouse and a rat differ by a greater amount in DNA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.