Evolutionary Informatics and Evolutionary Design

I think you missed the part where bioinformaticists design evolutionary algorithms and then ignorantly proceeding to claim "there are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms".

Is this a half-baked answer to my original question at post #5? If so, the phrase "Evolutionary Design" in your thread title is a bit farce-about-ace, not so, since there is no design in evolution. ( Unless you are an IDiot, of course, trying to muddy scientific thinking with a tincture of Bebeh Jebus, I suppose LOL! ).
:p
 
The ionly person here with muddied thinking is the one that said "there are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms". You have two guesses chopples.
 
Last edited:
The ionly person here with muddied thinking is the one that said "there are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms". You have two guesses chopples.

Watch your English now, wopples - we know how it degrades when you get angry.

Care to answer my question? Waiting....

:D:D
 
Chopples, when someone says there are no "designed" evolutionary algorithms and sh|t just happens, you know that person has lost it. Two guesses who that is.

Now let's see. Not only have you completely failed to post anything even remotely relevant because you just can't get how evolutionary algoritms can be used to design other things. You also ask weird questions about naming designers for you and what things in nature has been designed. You do get that this is the science section don't you?

But this is designed/artificially selected etc.... by ants. You know, those cute litlle molecular autonomous agents.
 
we can learn a lot from ants, I tell you!

They even got a chamber for the old ones to go and die in! No corpses lying around, they take care of themselves even until they are used up, which is the only thing they still need to try and evolve from: aging! I wonder how long it'll take for the genetics to figure out all by themselves which DNA is faulty and causing the tellemares falling off the end of them chromosomes?

They work so hard and none usurps another. What a fabulous example to us if only we could apply such collaboration and loyalty and dedication!

Not to mention they can carry more than ten times their own weight and the power they have in collaborating can move a fallen tree or clean a carcass in days.... perfectly designed and aerating the soil and fertilising the fauna... sheesh it is very charitibale of their genetics to have encoded such altruistic traits, it must have taken trillions of years to eventually come up with such highly evolved social and simbiotic traits!

Maybe we need to "encourage" our genetics to evolve a certain way by jiggle them algorithms and stimulating the process coz I doubt we got a trillion years before the next miosis renegade enahancement.

Unless maybe the ants take over and eventually after trillions of years they will have further evolved and the universe will be over run by ants!
 
Maybe we need to "encourage" our genetics to evolve a certain way by jiggle them algorithms and stimulating the process coz I doubt we got a trillion years before the next miosis renegade enahancement.

That would involve a value judgement, and the universe has no values.
 
I see. I appreciate the reply.:)
Pleasure :). If I may, I would like to revise my position a bit in order to describe my postion a bit more accurately.
I believe that everything that has a beginning has a cause.

Ok, to get back on topic:
1) Discuss evolutionary dynamics and fitness landscapes and how it is related to nature and other evolutionary algorithms.
2) See if there are any parallels between the two examples of how evolutionary informatics are applied in molecular biology.
3) How can evolutionary dynamics and evolutionary design principles be applied to real world problems?
 
Last edited:
Those wise little critters applying their genetic algorithms for survival. Guess chance favours the prepared genome...
Bacteria 'Invest' Wisely to Survive Uncertain Times, Scientists Report

ScienceDaily (Dec. 1, 2009) — Like savvy Wall Street money managers, bacteria hedge their bets to increase their chances of survival in uncertain times, strategically investing their biological resources to weather unpredictable environments.

In a new study available online and featured on the cover of Cell, UT Southwestern Medical Center researchers describe how bacteria play the market so well. Inside each bacterial cell are so-called genetic circuits that provide specific survival skills. Within the bacteria population, these genetic circuits generate so much diversity that the population as a whole is more tolerant of -- and is more likely to survive -- a wide range of variability in the environment.

"We have found that a particular genetic circuit is responsible for generating diversity within the bacteria population," said senior author Dr. GĂĽrol SĂĽel, assistant professor of pharmacology and in the Cecil H. and Ida Green Comprehensive Center for Molecular, Computational and Systems Biology at UT Southwestern.

This diversity, like a diversified investment portfolio, means that each bacterium has characteristics that allow it to survive under certain conditions, said Dr. SĂĽel. "When conditions are highly variable, some individual bacteria are equipped to thrive in the highs or lows, while others tank," he said. "It's like the stock market. If you invest all your money in just one stock, and conditions change to lessen or completely eliminate its value, you won't survive financially. Similarly, in the case of these bacteria, if all the cells were adapted to only a small, rigid set of environmental factors, the population would be wiped out if conditions unexpectedly changed.

"There seems to be an optimization going on in these organisms," he added.

By generating diversity, genetic circuits ensure enough cells will survive to carry over the population, especially in times of variable conditions, Dr. SĂĽel explained. Essentially, variability of bacterial cells appears to match the variability in the environment, thereby increasing the chances of bacterial survival, he said.

Genetic circuits are distinct sets of genes and proteins within cells that interact in a specific pattern, resulting in some biological process. In this study, the researchers focused on a genetic circuit within a bacterium that controls the transformation of bacteria cells in and out of a state called competence. Differences in the duration of the competence state have particular survival advantages, depending on the environmental conditions.

Biological "noise" in the genetic circuit, which comes from random fluctuations in the chemical reactions involved in the pattern of interactions, is similar to the undesirable noise -- like static heard on AM radio -- found in electrical circuits. In biological systems, however, biochemical "noise" is beneficial. In fact, it is the root mechanism that drives diversity within the bacteria population. Dr. SĂĽel previously found that when noise reaches a certain level in some genetic circuits, it can prompt cells to transform from one cellular state to another.

For the current study, the researchers went beyond studying the native genetic circuit. Just as electronic maps can find alternate routes between two points, the UT Southwestern researchers also developed an alternative, synthetic genetic circuit that used a different architecture -- or route -- to accomplish the same function as the native circuit.

Dr. SĂĽel believes his group is the first to insert such a synthetic genetic circuit into living bacterium and show that it can replace the biological function of the native version. He said his team was surprised to find that the behavior of the synthetic circuit was most precise, essentially generating less noise. The result was a population less diverse than the natural one. They were even more surprised to find that the lack of precision -- or greater noisiness -- in the native circuit ultimately allows bacteria to survive in a wider range of environments.

"It turns out that sometimes being sloppy can be good," Dr. SĂĽel said. "For these bacteria, the more variable they are, the better they will be able to perform because they can adapt to a wider range of environments."

Dr. SĂĽel said this approach of engineering alternative genetic circuits can in principle be applied even to human cells and possibly help explain why diseased cells have different survival capabilities than healthy ones.

Other UT Southwestern researchers involved were lead author Dr. Tolga Cagatay, instructor of pharmacology, and Dr. Marc Turcotte, assistant professor of pharmacology. Researchers from the California Institute of Technology and the Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya in Spain also participated.

The study was funded by the Welch Foundation, the James S. McDonnell Foundation, the European Commission and the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion in Spain.

Genetic algorithms are very good tools for optimization and finding optimal designs on a fitness landscape. These type of algorithms are present in bacteria and put to good use.... FOR survival.
 
it is a good thing that bacteria are tooo small to see for the natural eye, I remember growing cultures from common sources in the high school lab and the results of the diverse creep things squirming around in their thousands really gave me the heebie jeebies...

However, the fascination had set in and those single cell organisms stimulate so many thoughts about life and reproduction and survival and symbiotic relations and mutations and... and... To actually see the miosis take place under the microscope is amazing!

From my understanding, most "mutations" are harmful or genetic defects?
(I must admit that despite my keen interest, I do not have the time to indulge in all the links and threads so genorously provide for here)
Adaptations to environment are "alternative" genetic features already built in to the DNA?
(like getting calouses and thick finger nails to adapt when working with hands yet the children are not consequently born with caloused hands?)
The diversity is a built in algorithm to the given genetic make up?
Adaptation then does not take a trillion years of random mutating until the most suitable combination of DNA is best suited for the environment? Like a survival kit already built into the algorithms of the original genetic code?
This is my way of putting the concept into layman's terms
 
I wonder if phrony has the integrity to correct some of the misconceptions in Jenemesis's post above?
 
can answers come from a (cyber) ghost?

I wonder if phrony has the integrity to correct some of the misconceptions in Jenemesis's post above?

the questions are open to anyone for answering, Cyggie, I don't recall this thread being "ask-Phroney-and-only-he-will-answer" but an open discussion and I was asking not preconceiving inconclusive conceptualisms:confused:

Do you have any preconceived perceptions or conceptions or any other conclusive 'ceptions of any kind regarding my questions?;)

I did ask and I would like to hear from all perspectives on this concept, please, if you have ANY conclusive answers in layperson's terms, I would like to consider them
:D
 
LOL, Cyggie, your signature says science does NOT have ALL the answers either, see, we actually do agree on some things!
 
the questions are open to anyone for answering, Cyggie, I don't recall this thread being "ask-Phroney-and-only-he-will-answer" but an open discussion and I was asking not preconceiving inconclusive conceptualisms:confused:
I just wondered if he had the intellectual honesty to correct your mistakes.
Do you have any preconceived perceptions or conceptions or any other conclusive 'ceptions of any kind regarding my questions?;)
No but I know where you are mistaken.
I did ask and I would like to hear from all perspectives on this concept, please, if you have ANY conclusive answers in layperson's terms, I would like to consider them
:D
I'd have hoped that phrony would have corrected your "understanding" by now. I'll give it more time.

In the meantime if you had looked at talkorigins or wikipedia for yourself, you may have actually stumbled across one or two.
 
I wonder if phrony has the integrity to correct some of the misconceptions in Jenemesis's post above?
Are you spaced out again or something?
Unlike you "rationals", "rationalists", atheists and whatever other 'brights' out there, us plain old dumb theists tend to stick together and not criticize each other. We do not use your examples of criticizing each other in order to attain truth :p.

From my understanding, most "mutations" are harmful or genetic defects?
Mutations are just changes in the genetic make-up of an organism. They may be beneficial, harmless or harmful. They may be random or induced.

Adaptations to environment are "alternative" genetic features already built in to the DNA?
(like getting calouses and thick finger nails to adapt when working with hands yet the children are not consequently born with caloused hands?)
Adaptation can be a tricky thing to describe with the emergence of epigenetics. i do not have a full understanding of it yet.
But, I guess 2 different cases of "adaptations" can be described.
1) The way your body adapts towards a certain phenotype in response to an external stimuli, such as exercise or the sun. This happens within a generation.
2) The way organisms adapt to environments via selection. For example, the loss of sight in cave fish. Intergenerational. They can be irreversible due to mutations or reversible due to epigenetic changes, although research into the mechanism of epigenetic changes is ongoing.

The diversity is a built in algorithm to the given genetic make up?
Adaptation then does not take a trillion years of random mutating until the most suitable combination of DNA is best suited for the environment? Like a survival kit already built into the algorithms of the original genetic code?
This is my way of putting the concept into layman's terms
A different way of looking at it is by saying that each generation is about as optimal as it can be with regards to fitness.


But don't take my word for it, cyghost has read all about it on talkorigins, I am sure he will do a great job at explaining you these things (not that you need much explaining :p) by posting more than just a few links. Just give the fellar a ring, ask him to be constructive.
 
Last edited:
There you go Jenemesis. Your mistakes corrected and not by an evil atheist.
 
they wasn't mistakes, they was actually queries, can't you see the question marks at the end of them sentences?

I guess if it isn't in wikipedia then it aint fact neither? eh?

maybe we should all take wikipedia as the guru on the origins of life and the ultimate resource for the future of all life as well while we at it?
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X