On 01/25/2013 05:08 PM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: > On Jan 25, 2:37 am, David Bernier<david...@videotron.ca> wrote: >> On 01/25/2013 01:39 AM, Archimedes Plutonium wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> Basically I am just simply asking for what mathematical advantage for >>> mutations arises for inbreeding. I do not know if any biologist has >>> researched this question. The question of how much faster or how much >>> more mutations accrue when a population of a species has inbreeding. >>> Such as when 1 male and 1 female are stranded on a island and up to >>> those 2 individuals to keep their kind growing. So there is much >>> inbreeding. And not outside mating. So that all generations on the >>> island trace their ancestors back to those starting 2. >> >>> Compare that population with an equal sized population that has no >>> inbreeding. >> >>> I would hazard to guess that the mutations of the inbreeding >>> population would be far ahead of the non inbreeding population. >> >>> And I think this is how so many islands that are isolated from their >>> mainland have so many different species that the mainland does not >>> have, is because of what I call the species accelerant of inbreeding. >> >>> So that Neanderthal was two Africans that migrated north out of Africa >>> some 400,000 years ago and because of inbreeding ended up as different >>> species of the Africans who migrated enmasse some 60,000 years ago. >> >>> So that the Clovis man who migrated to the Americas, either out of >>> Asia or Europe some 15,000 years ago, if Clovis man had been a single >>> 1 male and 1 female and populated the Americas, that by the time of >>> Columbus would have found, not the same species of Homo sapiens, but >>> perhaps a different species. So here we have a sort of scientific >>> prediction or question, of how many Clovis people migrated to the >>> Americas some 15,000 years ago so that their genetic stock was >>> sufficient to not mutate too much so that by the time Columbus >>> arrived, they would still be the same Homo sapiens species. >> >>> So we need some biology research into what sort of mutation rate is >>> increased in populations with inbreeding versus populations of >>> noninbreeding. >> >>> And in sociology we can recognize the problem of the American Indians >>> in that they needed tribal interactions with other diverse tribes >>> because of inbreeding. >> >>> Usually inbreeding brings out deleterious mutations, and rarely does >>> it bring out advantageous mutations. >> >>> Now I would be deeply surprised if no biologist has done research on >>> this before, of extracting a number for mutation rate in a >>> noninbreeding population and a mutation rate in a inbreeding >>> population. >> >>> So if we had such a numbers figure for this mutation accelerant and >>> applied that numbers to Clovis Man, we may be able to roughly estimate >>> how many individuals, male and female crossed over into the Americas. >> >> [...] >> >> Some common genetic diorders are single-gene recessive, >> meaning that one good allele and one bad allele >> makes for an Ok baby (a carrier), but two bad >> alleles makes for a "bad" baby who exhibits or manifests >> the disease linked to the "bad allele". >> >> And two good alleles makes an Ok baby also. >> >> That's for the genes carried on the non-sexual chromosomes. >> For diseases single gene recessive on the X sexual >> chromosome, one allele bad of the gene on the X-chromosome >> makes for a "bad baby" if it's male, cause the male has >> one X and one Y sex-chromosome. But a female baby with >> two X-chomosomes and 1 good and 1 bad allele would be >> an Ok baby, but still a carrier. This happens with >> hemophilia, if memory serves me well. >> >> The genes that make for a strong baby who will reproduce >> with optimal number of off-spring is highly non-trivial. >> >> Some game theory could be involved and there could be several >> optimal fitness genomes; also, variation of gene pool could be >> an asset for a loosely-bound tribe. >> >> Maybe some models can say something about the optimal strategy >> for an individual, like say considering marrying a second-cousin >> by age 37 if all else fails. It's just speculation on my part >> that such studies/simulations/models exist. >> >> dave >> -- > > > > Hi David, now because you are holding a discussion with me in the sci. > newsgroups, I must warn you that there is a pitiful gaggle of persons > (jerks and freaks) > who will attack your email box to get you to stop talking with me. > This has been going on since 1993, where they attack everyone who > holds a conversation with Archimedes Plutonium. So be forewarned. Some > of those freaks will pretend to be me, but it is not me. So if you > see pollution in your email box, it is not me, but the hate-gaggle > crowd trying to get you to stop talking with me. > > Now I need a number and a equation of biology to where inbreeding > accelerates mutation rate. In a diverse population of a gene pool, the > mutation rate is say hypothetically, 1 in a 10^6 per year. In a gene > pool of say 1 male to 1 female reproduction and reproduction only > among those parents and their offspring, the mutation rate should > increase drastically to what I am guessing is 1 in 1000 per year. > > Maybe biology has already done the research and I am just not finding > the numbers. Perhaps biology was blind about inbreeding and never did > the research, because they never linked inbreeding with speeding up > mutation rate. > > Now a natural first experiment would be to do it with fruit flies > since they breed rapidly. So taking a Adam and Eve pair of fruit flies > and watching them mate with inbreeding since no "new genes" were > introduced, we can get a number figure for how much more rapid is the > mutations accruing than the control group of a diverse gene pool. > > Now likely the Neanderthals were a historical application of > inbreeding, in that a breeding pair wandered north from Africa into > Europe and with that pair some 400,000 years ago eventually gave the > Neanderthal species due to accelerated mutation because of inbreeding. > And when the diverse gene pool of Africans some 60,000 years ago > migrated into Europe, because they were diverse gene pool they had > superior genetics, especially HACNS1 with rock throwing superiority. > Neanderthal was a different species and so the African Homo sapiens > extincted them by rockthrowing encounters. > > David, have you ever played dodge-ball in High School? It is best when > the two sides are about equal in throwing abilities. If one side is > all girls and the other all boys, the boys win in quick order. It was > the same situation some 60,000 years ago when African Homo sapiens > encountered Homo Neanderthal. > > Now in human genetics with inbreeding we do glimpse the acceleration > of mutation by the European royal families and hemophilia. But that > was inbreeding with cousins. Imagine the mutations with inbreeding of > mother and son or brothers and sisters, or father and daughter. > > That is what faced Neanderthal when they trekked north some 400,000 > years ago. It is remarkable alone that they survived and populated > Europe, but no surprise at all that they became a distinct new species > with all that inbreeding and that they would be inferior to the Homo > sapiens that would invade 60,000 years ago. > > So I need a mathematical rate of mutation with inbreeding compared to > the rate of mutation where no inbreeding occurs. > > And I am rather sure that there is a huge rate increase in mutations > because one only needs to look at insect and bird species of a > mainland and the surrounding distant islands from that mainland. Those > islands usually contain different species from the mainland and > numerous different species all because inbreeding increases mutations > which then give rise to new species. [...]
I'm sorry I sent e-mail bombs to you when I was in Thailand.
You present the idea that higher mutation rates could be linked to inbreeding. I think recessive gene characters show what could be a drawback to inbreeding.
I'll defer to people in biology and paleontology on the fate of Neanderthal man.
David Bernier -- dracut:/# lvm vgcfgrestore File descriptor 9 (/.console_lock) leaked on lvm invocation. Parent PID 993: sh Please specify a *single* volume group to restore.