|
|
Re: use fruit flies to get a number data Re: inbreeding as a species-accelerant
; NOVA "Decoding Neanderthal" #199 Rockthrowing theory book
Posted:
Jan 26, 2013 11:08 AM
|
|
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.
|
|
