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

Skip to comments.

How Evolution Monkeys with Duplicate Genes
Academic Press Daily InScight ^ | March 5, 2002 | Ben Shouse

Posted on 03/12/2002 11:41:34 AM PST by Physicist

An endangered monkey has given scientists new insights into evolution. The leaf-eating douc langur, native to East and Southeast Asia, has a "duplicated" gene that started as an extra copy of a gene for a particular enzyme but mutated into a gene for another enzyme with a different purpose. By recreating the gene's path from one enzyme to the other, scientists have addressed an important debate over how natural selection shapes such duplications.

Throughout evolutionary history, extra copies of genes have popped up spontaneously in the genomes of many organisms. This gene duplication is thought to be a major source of new genes and adaptations. But scientists disagree about what method natural selection uses to modify the extra copies. Some say positive selection favors duplicated genes that take on a new function. Others credit the lack of negative selection; because the new gene is redundant, it is free to mutate until it finds a new job. But most studies are based on statistical analyses that cannot distinguish definitively between the alternatives.

Now, evolutionary geneticist Jianzhi Zhang of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, says both theories are right. He and his colleagues discovered a duplicated gene for an enzyme called ribonuclease in the douc langur. In humans and other primates, ribonuclease attacks double-stranded RNA; it may help defend against viruses, some of which contain such genetic material. But in douc langurs, the duplicate ribonuclease gene evolved into a gene for a digestive enzyme. This enzyme helps supply protein by digesting the single-stranded RNA of leaf-fermenting bacteria that live in the langur's intestine.

To find out how the duplicate evolved, the researchers created nine designer mutant proteins, each with one of the nine amino acid changes that separate the duplicate from the original. Every change reduced the enzyme's ability to degrade double-stranded RNA--the enzyme's original job. This hints at a lack of negative selection. But statistical analysis showed that the duplicate gene evolved much faster than would be expected from random change, suggesting that positive selection was at work too, the team reports in the March 2002 issue of Nature Genetics.

Shozo Yokoyama, an evolutionary biologist at Syracuse University in New York state, says Zhang's functional tests are a difficult and essential step toward understanding the role of duplication. But the final answer is still not there, he says. More research is needed to show not only how the amino acid changes reduced the ribonuclease's old function, but also how they helped it reach its new function.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: crevolist; douclangur; enzymes; evolution; homosexual; realscience
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 381-397 next last
A common creationist canard is the insistence that there is no mechanism by which new genes can arise through natural selection. Here is one mechanism by which that occurs.
1 posted on 03/12/2002 11:41:34 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jennyp; PatrickHenry; RadioAstronomer; junior; VadeRetro; ThinkPlease; longshadow
Any of you folks have a comprehensive bump list?
2 posted on 03/12/2002 11:43:52 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: crevo_list;Physicist
Like so? ;)
3 posted on 03/12/2002 11:46:34 AM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Evolution;RealScience
lists
4 posted on 03/12/2002 11:48:31 AM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Others credit the lack of negative selection; because the new gene is redundant, it is free to mutate until it finds a new job.

I would say that because the genes are redundant, either is free to mutate (in the first step). It doesn't matter which one changes at first; this doubles the chance that the first step will be in a helpful direction.

5 posted on 03/12/2002 11:54:52 AM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: general_re
Evolution and blimps never went anywhere---remember the hindenberger-darwin kaput-bust!
6 posted on 03/12/2002 11:55:55 AM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Scully; Lev; <1/1,000,000th%; cracker; js1138; RightWhale; Doctor Stochastic; JediGirl
Ping.
7 posted on 03/12/2002 11:56:23 AM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Exlax--enema(physics?) is more like it--blocked brain-colon!
8 posted on 03/12/2002 11:58:16 AM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Too bad Christmas has passed, but when's your birthday? I think I'm gonna shell out a couple of bucks and buy you a copy of "Elements of Style"....
9 posted on 03/12/2002 11:59:09 AM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
remember the hindenberger-darwin kaput-bust!

lakehurst--flames/death--natural selection...helium modification/change--goodyear: evolution!!1!

10 posted on 03/12/2002 12:01:31 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: general_re
...diarrhea-evolution too!
11 posted on 03/12/2002 12:02:00 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
From the evolution outhouse--methane-sewer gas(match?)!
12 posted on 03/12/2002 12:04:13 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Welcome!

Free Republic is an online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America. And we always have fun doing it. Hoo-yah!

13 posted on 03/12/2002 12:07:38 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian

14 posted on 03/12/2002 12:07:44 PM PST by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
You have first assume evolution then seek mechanisms. That is a belief based approach - you know like a religion.
15 posted on 03/12/2002 12:08:10 PM PST by DaveyB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
It doen't really talk about the mechanism of how an extra copy jean arises. It just says they pop up spontaneously.
16 posted on 03/12/2002 12:08:48 PM PST by TXFireman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: f.Christian
Reason furthers conservatism.
17 posted on 03/12/2002 12:11:19 PM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mlo
Any ol reason...plant--animal--mineral--liberal??
18 posted on 03/12/2002 12:13:11 PM PST by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DaveyB
True so true. This screed does nothing to suggest how such a copy of an existing gene could so frequently get into the right place and so seldom get into the wrong place, other than the old canard of blind chance. We are being asked to believe that genes that hop around frenetically enough to create a significant number of new developments like this, are not at the same time throwing a vastly worse monkey wrench (pardon the pun) into overall survival, with not just serious but also cumulative damage. If I copy words around randomly within a document, I am far more likely to produce nonsense than I am to create something new that makes sense.
19 posted on 03/12/2002 12:27:41 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
I might add that "microdeletions" are also an important part of the evolutionary mix.

I have been following Dr.Karayiorgou's work with chromosome 22 and schizophrenia, where Karayiorgou and her colleagues "favor proline as the culprit" for schizophrenia.

"Earlier studies have shown that between 25 percent and 30 percent of people with certain errors on a narrow region of chromosome 22 develop schizophrenia in adolescence or adulthood. The flaws, called "microdeletions," are also rampant in the rare cases of children who develop the disease."
20 posted on 03/12/2002 12:32:28 PM PST by Neuromancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 381-397 next last

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.

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