[general_re]

I may have misread his post, but in any case, I meant to leave aside the issure of mutation altogether and discuss functionality of genes. What I wanted to get at was that it's long been a dead letter that one gene = one phenotypical trait, and it's also a dead letter that one gene = one protein, since with a simple frame shift, a single gene can produce mutiple proteins by changing the offset. And, of course, further functionality can come about, as I understand it, by changes in higher-order structures, insofar as the genome changes its tertiary or quaternary structure in order to restrict access to, or further expose, a part of itself...

[Nebullis]

What I wanted to get at was that it's long been a dead letter that one gene = one phenotypical trait, and it's also a dead letter that one gene = one protein, since with a simple frame shift, a single gene can produce mutiple proteins by changing the offset.

You are right that it's long been a dead letter but it has nothing whatsoever to do with frame shift mutations. Anyway, I hope that some of your good argument is sinking in with "maro".