Concerning the theory of evolution

>>130396868
>genetic information

Hi mohammed.

Still don't understand evolution, huh?

>>130396868
Gene or full genome duplications can provide new selection material can potentially create new biological functions over evolutionary time.

>>130398075

deleterous mutations are billion fold more numerous.

>>130397911
My name isnt mohammed and i do understand it. I unfortunatley dont get your point.

>>130398162
Yeah but mutations only alter existing genes or noncoding regions, duplication events allow for the addition of new genes.
Just because it is uncommon doesn't mean it's not significant, over hundreds of millions of years that kind of genome alteration matters.
The more base pairs in an organism's genome, the more opportunities for mutations (more evolutionary opportunities).

>>130398075
If something isnt observed to happen, information increasing muation, why should we assume that it happens when it has more genes to work on. Also according to the theory of evolution, mutations need to be acted upon by natural selection which cant happen if the muatations affect non functional duplicated gnomes

File: eye evolution.jpg (42KB, 600x283px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 600x283px

Just google it. Here is the evolutionary development of the eye, for example.

>>130396868
retard.

what matters is ARRANGEMENT of information.

tl;dr 3 base pairs makes a codon which codes for an amino acid. If you change ONE base pair, you usually get DIFFERENT amino acid.

Then, there's a bunch of stuff that happens where amino acids are arranged into a protein. The structure of protein is dependent entirely on the amino acids itself.

Then, proteins do important tasks that your cells need. The tasks is completely dependent on the structure of protein itself.

big tldr: same information arranged in different way makes novel molecules that may do different functions which cascades into new features and shiz over time. This is Evolution mothafucka.

Basically, evolution is usually about the arrangement of information, not the new information. However, there are rare occurrences where the new information does come in play. See horizontal gene transfer where virus injects dna and the new dna proves to be beneficial and passed into future generations.

>>130398697
>My name isnt mohammed and i do understand it. I unfortunatley dont get your point.

1. what is genetic information

2. How much "Genetic Information" is required to form a hand?

>>130399213
First this does not adress my question which was: what is tghe source of new genetic information required for evolution if it is mutations name examples. Secondly each type of eye in that diagram is functional and suits the orgabism that has it. Some of the “primitive” ones can see more colors than our eyes for example, but if this diagram is a true representation of what happend. How did the "simple" light sensing pigment with its neuronal connections arise in the first place? How did the eye evolve by random chance while still remaining functional?

>>130399331
Did u intentionaly miss my point or are you just that dense? I am not arguing about the meaning of genetic information or where it comes from. I am askig for examples which u did not provide. The virus injecting dna is already existing information. The suppsoedly single celled ancestor that we all have needed to develop knew genes on its own. Where did this information come from.

File: gene duplication.png (199KB, 652x535px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 652x535px

>>130398870
Mutation rate is effected by some environmental conditions (UV light, DNA adducts, etc.) but for simplicity, let's assume it remains more or less constant over long periods of time.
Most mutations are negative or neutral, with only a minority of mutations offering a fitness advantage. When a mutation does offer an advantage e.g. in the alteration of a promoter region to allow increased expression of a useful protein (for a given environment), or some gain of function mutation in a coding region that alters the structure of a protein in some way that benefits the mutated organism, that mutation is eventually fixed in the population due to the fitness advantage it offers, while the unmutated gene is greatly reduced or lost.
So to answer your question, mutation alters existing genetic code and then selection changes the genetic information at a population level over time.

More genetic material following a duplication means more opportunities for selection to act on a genome, it's like having a bigger surface area.
And yes, the gene or region must be involved in some biological function for selection to occur.
Most of the time, duplication results in pseudogenization, but sometimes it results in neofunctionalisation.
While this only occurs for a minority of duplication events, it is evolutionarily significant over long periods of time.
This process allows for the creation of new genes without displacing existing genes.

>>130396868
Please look at the developement of Human ebryos snd recessive genes.

Sometimes humans get born with reptilian hearts.
Snakes grow actual legs.
And so on.

>>130396868
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment
Here's your example, 40,000 generations of ecoli in the same environment, one of the strains develops the ability to eat a new food source, others start developing strategies for optimising space requirements.

>>130399509
1 our dna contains genes which has is made of nucelotides arrnged in a specific sequence which is used as instructions to make proteins. It also has areas which regulate expression dna duplication and other functions. This is all information stored in our dna.
2 during our embryo genesis information in our dna is used to direct the formation of our hands and other organs.

File: IMG_0773.jpg (51KB, 300x333px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 300x333px

>>130399213

but why...

and when did 0 become 1.

how did 0 become 1.

what did 0 become 1.

where did 0 become 1.

>>130400668
Tgey did not develop any new abilities. These bacteria already had functioning citric acid cycles. However during areobic conditions these bacteria did not produce a transporter which it normally produces during anreobic conditions. So we can see here tgat the bacteria already has all of the neccesary components to utilize citrate, but it now does so during areobic conditions which is likley due to error of regulation of the production of the transporter.

lobsters and humans both react to seratonin in similar ways implying a shared ancestor.

>>130396868
>I dont understand evolution.

>>130398697
>I do understand evolution.

Achmed plz.

>>130400671
>reading a wikipedia article you barely understand doesnt give you the ability to talk intellegently on a topic.
1.our DNA is made up of nucleotides that are arranged in coding and non coding portions that allow differential production of protiens depending on external regulatory factors.
2. the DNA is only tangentially involved in growth. the cells divide, produce protiens, and depending on various hormonal and signaling factors differentiate.

DNA does not play a pivotal role in embryogenesis. Most of the change is on the cellular level, not a genetic one

>>130401290
The paper quite literally stated all the relevant changes to it's DNA, repeat experiments confirmed. It's mutations m8.

>>130401785
Saying that i do understand evolution then claiming that there are no examples for functional information adding mutation implies that i think that its far from the fact of life tgat people seem to belive that it is. A simple deduction that a even an sjw could make.

>>130400108
>How did the "simple" light sensing pigment with its neuronal connections arise in the first place? How did the eye evolve by random chance while still remaining functional?

The eye happened by pure random chance and environmental factors. A population of fish that lived in a light dependent environment would have one offspring eventually born with this mutation. This would make it much more survivable than blind fish, so it would mate and produce more offspring. Over time the mutation becomes fixed in the genome (100% chance of having it), and every fish in the population has it. Then its basically waiting around for another significant mutation

>>130402118
Mutations occur randomly in the genome, most mutations don't have an effect. The ones that do are selected for/against by environmental conditions, this then changes the frequency of the mutation in the population as the mutated individual propagates more rapidly or dies out completely.

>>130401967
I see no contradiction in the first point.
Regarding the second point however, saying that dna plays only a small role in embryogenesis and growth is an outrageous statement. Simoly because mutations can cause congenital abnormalities and cancer through mutations of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes( which regulate cell division)

>>130402118
There is plenty of evidence rafiq, youre tiny monkey brain is too fucking stupid to see it. Literally humans are the product of billions of years of mutations.

And no mutations aren't this massive event i biology, it is guaranteed to happen at some point, and in biology a mutation is literally:

ATCATAGCTGTTTCCAGAG

being altered to

ATCATAGCTGTATCCAGAG

And that 1 nucleotide change is enough to change the protein product of that gene, which can result in an entirely different physiology or a new metabolic pathway

File: sickle cell anaemia.gif (6KB, 316x193px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 316x193px

>>130402902
>And that 1 nucleotide change is enough to change the protein product of that gene, which can result in an entirely different physiology
For example, sickle cell anaemia, which this negroid probably has.

>>130402426
>pure random chance
If it is logical to assume that neuronal connections and light sensing pigments, significantly complex structures, can arise by random chance. Wouldnt it be also logical to assume that if i find a stone with a story carved on it that eroding factors randomly carved the story?

>>130402724
>Simoly because mutations can cause congenital abnormalities and cancer through mutations of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes( which regulate cell division)

Quick question rafiq, do you know that there is an ungodly low the chance for you to get a deleterious mutation correct? Congenital abnormalities and cancer are absolutely a non issue in embryo genesis because if by some statistical feat the embryo gets fucking cancer it will undergo a spontaneous abortion and terminate the pregnancy.

The reason why cancer is a thing is because humans expose themselves to carcinogens and stimuli that increase the chances of getting cancer. couple that with humans living way past their intended expiration date (yes humans are not designed to die of old age), and cancer is almost guaranteed because eventually youll have a mutation that will cause it, especially if you live past late adulthood.

>>130403333
yes, if given enough time (i.e. billions and billions of years), then im sure a human would carve a stone in a story and claim have "found it" or find an eroded slab that they mistake for a divine message.

besides, it is logical to assume that complex biological structures happen by change because there is ample evidence of this. Literally type in google "proof of evolution pubmed" and you'll get tons of scientific research articles youre too stupid to comprehend. There is zero evidence however that some sandnigger retard named mohammed did anything of note other than make shit up.

Go to college outside of the middle east and learn biology unabridged rather than letting Imam Sand Nigger dictate what is real and what isnt.

What you are looking for OP is GOF (gain of function) mutations that are certainly more rare than single base pair changes or point mutations. Deletions are another kind of more common mutation typically resulting in the loss of gene>protein function.

As for your resistance maybe beta lactamase might provide a posible answer (im too lazy to look it up k). It may be horizontally transferred now, but it had to originate at sone point

The Huntingtin gene and protein are also the result of a tri-nucleotide repeat expansion that makes a new protein that totally fucks you up.

Arguably the most important driving factor for bacteria to humans is the drive for energy metabolism and survival as per the endosymbiont theory of evolution. Interestingly enough most of the bacterial genes are thought to have moved to eukaryotic host as mitochondria have relatively few genes and need to import proteins. Search pubmed and read some of the theories on it if you are more interested. I'd grab sime science for you but im phone cancer right now.

>>130403333
What is your agenda here? Creationism? Big ol' skydaddy doing some intelligent design?

Evolution is adaptation by driven random changes. Driven, because productive or neutral changes survive while counter productive changes die off. Over millions of years positive or neutral changes accumulate, thus drive evolution.

E. coli has 4.7 mio base pairs and a mutation rate of 0.0001 mutations per generation with a generation time of 20 minutes. After 500 generations or 8.5 hours there is one mutation. In a year there are 1000 mutations. After 5000 years more mutations occured than there are base pairs in the genome of E. coli. Earth is about 4 billion years old, let's say bacteria exist for 3 billion years, so in this time span the E. coli genome could have been "rewritten" 600000 times based alone on mutation rate, excluding e.g. lateral gene transfer.

>>130396868
>If the answer is genetic mutations please provide examples.
This is /pol/. Take your I'm-too-stupid-to-understand-biology request to >>>/wsr/

>>130400671
>1 our dna contains genes which has is made of nucelotides arrnged in a specific sequence which is used as instructions to make proteins. It also has areas which regulate expression dna duplication and other functions. This is all information stored in our dna.

So, you are saying that additional nucleotide basepairs equate to "Genetic Information", yes?

There are several methods that introduce additional nucleotide sequences into a genetic code....

Insertion is one of the mechanisms by which chromosome length can be increased during meiosis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insertion_%28genetics%29

>2 during our embryo genesis information in our dna is used to direct the formation of our hands and other organs.

Genetics is far more complex than just adding a few more base pairs in order to get hands, it's more about synthesizing specific proteins and enzymes at the right stages, coupled with epigenetic factors like developmental hormones that combine to form philogenetic structures on a macro-scale.

As in, there is no "Hand Gene", it's more a cluster of specific genes that code for skeletal, skin, musculature, neuronal, etc, in the right combinations to later form the basic structure of the hand.

Evolution is an incredibly complex subject because it is basically macroscale chemistry, and all the complexity that implies.

the "Genetic Information" argument is often used by those who debate against the theory of evolution, due to their lack of understanding of the subject matter.