Slashdot Mirror


Opposable Thumbs and Upright Walking Caused By "Junk DNA"

quinnlynn writes "A group of research scientists at Yale discovered that the evolution of opposable thumbs and upright walking in humans is due to changes in the genome in the areas still classified as "junk DNA." Quoting: 'Results from a comparative analysis of the human, chimpanzee, rhesus macaque and other genomes reported in the journal Science suggest our evolution may have been driven not only by sequence changes in genes, but by changes in areas of the genome once thought of as "junk DNA." ... Researchers have long suspected changes in gene expression contributed to human evolution, but this had been difficult to study until recently because most of the sequences that control genes had not been identified. In the last several years, scientists have discovered that non-coding regions of the genome, far from being junk, contain thousands of regulatory elements that act as genetic "switches" to turn genes on or off.'" Yale has also recently completed sequencing the Trichoplax genome. Trichoplax has the simplest known animal genome, and it shares 80 percent of its genes (comprised of 98 million base pairs) with humanity. Professor Stephen Dellaporta was quoted saying, "We are [excited] to find that Trichoplax contains shared pathways and defined regulatory sequences that link these most primitive ancestors to higher animal species. The Trichoplax genome will serve as a type of 'Rosetta Stone' for understanding the origins of animal-specific pathways."

9 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. I for one .... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny
    Sometimes these factoids scare the coffee out of me ...

    ... still unknown whether HACNS1 causes changes in gene expression in human limb development or whether HACNS1 would create human-like limb development if introduced directly into the genome of a mouse.

    When shall we welcome our furry, opposable thumbed overlords. Could Douglas Adams had been right all along?

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  2. In other words... by pushing-robot · · Score: 4, Funny

    In the last several years, scientists have discovered that non-coding regions of the genome, far from being junk, contain thousands of regulatory elements that act as genetic "switches" to turn genes on or off.

    ...Biologists discover "flags". Seriously, these guys should just bring a programmer on-staff — preferably assembly, as decoding the arcane secrets of all Earth life should be a breeze for anyone whose day job involves the x86 instruction set.

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    1. Re:In other words... by $RANDOMLUSER · · Score: 2, Funny

      Heh. Good point. I know that a lot of my code that's been around for a long time may contain as much as 30% commented out code, not to mention all the stuff in #ifdef blocks.

      --
      No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
  3. Re:So what is this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yea, I didn't RTFA. Is this stuff sRNA/ncRNA something like that? Does it look like it forms secondary structure? Someone smart reply please. :)

    Maybe.

  4. Re:Mouse Embryos != Human Embryos by Fyz · · Score: 2, Funny

    I salute your 19th century soapbox rant about the 21st century! You sir, are the epitomy of human evolution!

  5. Finally. by ari+wins · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm glad I can now scientifically justify why I like a little junk in the trunk.

    --
    Don't worry if you're a kleptomaniac, you can always take something for it.
  6. Lovely... by DelitaTheFridge · · Score: 4, Funny

    Our DNA has a goddamn registry.

  7. Re:Just like the brain areas "you don't use" by Cyberax · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does it share 90% of schematics with Core 2?

  8. Intelligent Designer Does Not Design Junk by Louis+Savain · · Score: 1, Funny

    Junk DNA is a prediction of evolutionary biology. Intelligent Design theory, on the other hand, predicts that there can be no such thing as junk DNA because an intelligent designer would not purposely design junk. So the OP is right; this is more proof that evolution is wrong. What do evolutionists have to say to that? ahahaha...

    Why was the parent modded down as flamebait? Is it because it is telling an inconvenient truth to the atheist moderators on Slashdot? I think so.

    It is true that junk DNA is a prediction of evolutionary biology. And it is true that ID predicts that there is no junk DNA for the simple reason that an intelligent designer does not design junk.

    You just can't take the truth when it contradicts your Darwinist/atheist agenda.