Let's do some EVOLUTION homework...

antowan

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 1, 2003
Messages
13,054
In this thread you are only allowed to give an opinion if you post a link to science around evolution.

No link should be the same, so find info other than that shared....


Here's mine: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/lines_01

Have fun but remember you are not allowed to comment if you don't provide an original link to science around evolution...
 

Bullvein

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
286
http://www.talkorigins.org/

Ignore the lines below this if you just want to learn stuff, it's just preemptive measures against whats coming. :)

Nothing to discuss IMHO facts are facts.

When the Catholic Church agrees on Darwin and evolution, conversation is kinda redundant, no ? :)
 
Last edited:

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
12,851
Cool!
Of Yeast and Men: An Evolutionary Tale

ScienceDaily (May 7, 2012) — The adult human body consists of trillions of cells. Cell proliferation is accomplished by means of cell division in which an existing cell serves as the exact blueprint for its progeny. This process follows the same basic principles in all higher organisms. First, the genetic information is precisely copied and subsequently equally distributed between the mother and daughter. The major task for the dividing cell is to drag two complete sets of chromosomes to the opposite sides of the nucleus, respectively.

120507101802.jpg

Dividing human cancer cell. The DNA (gray) is attached to the spindle apparatus (pseudocolored). This cell is in metaphase, the cell division stage where duplicated chromosomes are optimally positioned for subsequent distribution to either spindle pole. (Credit: IMP/Ladurner)

A logistic challenge accomplished by the interplay of two factors: the spindle apparatus that acts as the molecular motor driving chromosome movements, and the kinetochore that constitutes the physical platform between the DNA and the mitotic spindle.

The attachment site formed by the kinetochore is an intricate protein network. While its components providing the direct contact point for the spindle are very well preserved from yeast to human, evolution of the DNA-binding proteins remained puzzling given that the underlying DNA template is highly variable.

Now, a novel study published in the June edition of Nature Cell Biology sheds light onto the cryptic molecular relationship between the yeast and human kinetochore. Principal investigator Stefan Westermann and his team tracked the missing evolutionary link and opened up new insights into the architecture and function of the key division organelle.

The correct shape pieces the puzzle together

"The clue was to take a close look at the protein sequence as well as specific sequence motifs that get an amino acid chain into its particular shape." says Stefan Westermann. "In this way, our bioinformatician Alexander Schleiffer was able to predict a number of novel DNA-binding kinetochore proteins and assigned them to the respective human homolog." Follow-up experiments strongly supported analogous function of the proteins. "Yeast is still an informative model organism and very easy to handle. Our current findings can now direct similar studies in more complex systems. There erroneous chromosome segregation is deleterious for the cell and a common cause of cancer" explains the scientist.

Pull chromosomes together
One of the novel proteins, termed Cnn1, turns out to be of special interest. It connects to the kinetochore molecule Ndc80 that is the major contact point for the spindle apparatus. "This particular interaction is not essential for the initial attachment of the spindle. It rather plays a supporting role that timely overlaps with maximal pulling forces acting on the chromosomes" says Stefan Westermann.

Google youtube for some nice videos on the spindle apparatus and related motors in dividing cells :).
 

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
12,851
Who would have thought....

Turtles More Closely Related to Birds Than Lizards and Snakes, Genetic Evidence Shows

ScienceDaily (May 23, 2012) — The evolutionary origin of turtles is one of the last unanswered questions in vertebrate evolution. Paleontological and morphological studies place turtles as either evolving from the ancestor of all reptiles or as evolving from the ancestor of snakes, lizards, and tuataras. Conflictingly, genetic studies place turtles as evolving from the ancestor of crocodilians and birds.

120523200301.jpg

Bird on turtle's back in the Galapagos Islands. (Credit: © Marcel Hurni / Fotolia)

Having recently looked at more than a thousand of the least-changed regions in the genomes of turtles and their closest relatives, a team of Boston University researchers has confirmed that turtles are most closely related to crocodilians and birds rather than to lizards, snakes, and tuataras.
The researchers published their findings in the Royal Society journal Biology Letters. By showing that turtles are closer relatives to crocodiles and birds (archosaurs) than lizards, snakes and tuatara (lepidosaurs), the study challenges previous anatomical and paleontological assessments. Nick Crawford, a post-graduate researcher in biology in BU's Graduate School of Arts & Sciences and lead author of the study, achieved these findings by using computational analysis to examine regions of the different animals' genomes.
"Turtles have been an enigmatic vertebrate group for a long time and morphological studies placed them as either most closely related to the ancestral reptiles, that diverged early in the reptile evolutionary tree, or as closer to lizards, snakes, and tuataras," says Crawford.
The study is the first genomic-scale analysis addressing the phylogenetic position of turtles, using over 1000 loci from representatives of all major reptile lineages including tuatara (lizard-like reptiles found only in New Zealand). Earlier studies of morphological traits positioned turtles at the base of the reptile tree with lizards, snakes and tuatara (lepidosaurs), whereas molecular analyses typically allied turtles with crocodiles and birds (archosaurs).
The BU researchers challenged a recent analysis of shared microRNA families that suggested turtles are more closely related to lepidosaurs. They did this with data from many single-copy nuclear loci dispersed throughout the genome, using sequence capture, high-throughput sequencing and published genomes to obtain sequences from 1145 ultraconserved elements (UCEs) and their variable flanking DNA. The resulting phylogeny provides overwhelming support for the hypothesis that turtles evolved from a common ancestor of birds and crocodilians, rejecting the hypothesized relationship between turtles and lepidosaurs.
The researchers used UCEs because they are easily aligned portions of extremely divergent genomes, allowing many loci to be interrogated across evolutionary timescales, and because sequence variability within UCEs increases with distance from the core of the targeted UCE, suggesting that phylogenetically informative content in flanking regions can inform hypotheses spanning different evolutionary timescales. The combination of taxonomic sampling, the genome-wide scale of the sampling and the robust results obtained, regardless of analytical method, indicates that the turtle-archosaur relationship is unlikely to be caused by long-branch attraction or other analytical artefacts.
The BU study is the first to produce a well-resolved reptile tree that includes the tuatara and multiple loci, and also is the first to investigate the placement of turtles within reptiles using a genomic-scale analysis of single-copy DNA sequences and a complete sampling of the major relevant evolutionary lineages. Because UCEs are conserved across most vertebrate groups and found in groups including yeast and insects, this framework is generalizable beyond this study and relevant to resolving ancient phylogenetic enigmas throughout the tree of life. This approach to high throughput phylogenomics -- based on thousands of loci -- is likely to fundamentally change the way that systematists gather and analyse data.
 

Elimentals

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Messages
10,819
Interesting interview with Elizabeth Culotta on the roots of racism
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6083/825/suppl/DC1

On work done in:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/336/6083/825.summary

Racial prejudice apparently stems from deep evolutionary roots and a universal tendency to form coalitions and favor our own side. And yet what makes a "group" is mercurial: In experiments, people easily form coalitions based on meaningless traits or preferences—and then favor others in their "group." Researchers have explored these innate biases and begun to ask why such biases exist. What factors in our evolutionary past have shaped our coalitionary present—and what, if anything, can we do about it now? Several avenues of research are probing the origins of what many psychologists call in-group love and out-group hate. Researchers are testing the implicit biases of young children and even primates, and devising experiments to ratchet bias up and down. Evolutionary researchers are trying to parse the group environments of our ancestors and are debating just how big a selective pressure came from out-group male warriors.

I know touchy subject as it touch 2 aspects that normally start "wars" on this forum "evolution" and "racism" so to keep to the OP's wishes and if you feel like discussing it please make a new thread in PD or off topic.
 
Top