All Humans Are Mutants, Say Scientists

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

All Humans Are Mutants, Say Scientists

Posted by timothy on Wednesday September 2, 2009 @07:40AM from the must-scramble-some-eggs dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "In 1935, JBS Haldane, one of the founders of modern genetics, studied a group of men with the blood disease hemophilia and speculated that there would be about 150 new mutations in each human being. Now BBC reports that scientists have used next generation sequencing technology to produce a far more direct and reliable estimate of the number of mutations by looking at thousands of genes belonging to two Chinese men who are distantly related, having shared a common ancestor who was born in 1805. To establish the rate of mutation, the team examined an area of the Y chromosome which is unique because, apart from rare mutations, the Y chromosome is passed unchanged from father to son so mutations accumulate slowly over the generations. Despite many generations of separation, researchers found only 12 differences among all the DNA letters examined. The two Y chromosomes were still identical at 10,149,073 of the 10,149,085 letters examined."

21 of 309 comments (clear)

Aha! Evidence.... by jdgeorge · 2009-09-02 07:46 · Score: 4, Funny

And here we have scientific evidence that human mutation is working as Designed.
Weird, I'm suddenly craving a bowl of spaghetti.
1. Re:Aha! Evidence.... by natehoy · 2009-09-02 07:50 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Don't forget, His Noodly Appendages must be served slightly al dente (unless you're an infidel who likes squishy appendages), and the proper attire is, of course, pirate.
  
  --
  "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
2. Re:Aha! Evidence.... by tomhudson · 2009-09-02 08:37 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Sacrilege!
  The Fourth Council of Ristorante determined that there is no such thing as "slightly" al dente. It is al dente or not al dente; there is no in-between. The path to damnation is lined with compromise, and we'll have none of that here!
  Glory to his name, Ramen.
  
  Just throw it at the wall and see if it sticks - that's how all important decisions are made in politics, marketing (but I repeat myself), religion, the workplace ... if you used your noodle, you'd realize that!
Yay! Mutant Super Powers! by spun · 2009-09-02 07:48 · Score: 4, Funny

My mutant super power is my ability to get depressed and lose focus. Oh man, I wish I'd gotten that cool one that gives you resistance to malaria and painfully inflamed fingers and toes. Mine seems kinda useless by comparison.

--
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Re:May I opt out on the yellow spandex? by Anonymous Coward · 2009-09-02 07:48 · Score: 5, Funny

I for one, welcome us all! :)
I get 450 mutations per generation by peter303 · 2009-09-02 07:49 · Score: 4, Interesting

Y = 1/300th total chromosome
3600 mutations total
8 generations in 200 years
450 per generation
5 in protein coding section of genome
That cant be right by JustNiz · 2009-09-02 07:49 · Score: 4, Funny

That cant be generally true otherwise all Chinese people would look identical. oh wait...
Article title seems stupid to me by Mathinker · 2009-09-02 07:54 · Score: 4, Insightful

Given what we know about biology, every living thing, including viruses, are mutants (or at least descendants of mutants).
The article title has to be one of the more braindead ones I've seen here on Slashdot, and I've been around for a while. (And somehow I don't understand how it's connected with the information in the summary.)
OTOH, I'm real tired....
1. Re:Article title seems stupid to me by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · 2009-09-02 08:05 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  I'd suspect that the actual paper is probably more interesting in some way, nobody would waste time, money, and perfectly good grad students to determine that mutation does, in fact, occur in humans. Quantification of mutation rates, examination of which regions mutate quickly and which are highly conserved, and the like are all legitimate and nonobvious.
  
  Probably just didn't survive a collision with the pop-science filter very well...
2. Re:Article title seems stupid to me by supernova_hq · 2009-09-02 08:51 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Yes, I was thinking the same. The very idea of evolution is based on mutation, and Evolution requires it as well.
  Unless you live in Kansas......
Weird Headline by Alphanos · 2009-09-02 07:55 · Score: 4, Interesting

Rather than making me think that all humans are mutants, this made me think: Wow, over a runtime of 204 years, the DNA copying process has an accuracy of 99.99988%, or an error rate of only 0.00012%.
I think we'll be hard-pressed to replicate that level of awesomeness in computers anytime soon.

--
Alphanos
1. Re:Weird Headline by Rich0 · 2009-09-02 08:06 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Uh, we do all the time.
  The diploid human genome is 8 gigabases. Each base encodes 2 bits of data. That is 4GB of data per genome. Let's say that a gamete is produced after 1000 generations of cells from the fertilized egg (no idea what the right number is, but I suspect that the true figure is lower). That means that 4TB of data is being copied, with an error rate of 450 bits.
  If I want I can set up two 4TB raids on my server at home (assuming I had more disk space), and issue the command dd if=/dev/mdx of=/dev/mdy bs=1M count=4000000. Then I could do a diff on the two volumes. I'd be shocked if they had any errors at all.
  These kinds of error rates are actually not all that uncommon with computers.
  Now, the 204 year bit sounds impressive, but it isn't like a piece of DNA lasted 204 years without any decay. Instead it was copied repeatedly over that time. If I copied that 4TB hard drive once every 25 years (generation time) onto a brand new drive (assuming that you could keep making them compatible) I don't think that getting the data across 200 years without any bit-flips is really that tall of an order. Sure, technology will change, but that really is a different matter, and I doubt that any commodity computer technology used in the next 200 years will do any worse than what we have today.
2. Re:Weird Headline by coldincalifornia · 2009-09-02 08:56 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Now, the 204 year bit sounds impressive, but it isn't like a piece of DNA lasted 204 years without any decay. Instead it was copied repeatedly over that time. If I copied that 4TB hard drive once every 25 years (generation time) onto a brand new drive (assuming that you could keep making them compatible) I don't think that getting the data across 200 years without any bit-flips is really that tall of an order. Sure, technology will change, but that really is a different matter, and I doubt that any commodity computer technology used in the next 200 years will do any worse than what we have today.
  Actually, it's more than copying the drive once every 25 years, it's making a copy of data on the drive many times each day -- some where around the 100,000th copy of the drive randomly choose a copy to keep and start the process over again. With that kind of usage on a drive, the failure rate (let alone error rate) will be _much_ higher.
Try Alabama by SnarfQuest · 2009-09-02 08:03 · Score: 4, Funny

Try this in Alabama, where they can use the terms wife,mother,and daughter interchangeably.

--
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
Re:X-Men 2 was wrong then? by loteck · 2009-09-02 08:12 · Score: 5, Funny

I seem to remember them saying that the mutations come from the father, how women are mutants I don't know.
I have shocking news for you, you may want to have a seat: women have fathers, just like men. Disturbing, I know.
Re:so females evolve faster? by gurps_npc · 2009-09-02 08:17 · Score: 4, Informative

No. You forget that men get an X also. And they don't get a back up, so any mutation in the X is more likely to show up in men.
In other words, the X evolves faster than the Y, and as men only get one X, anything on a single X becomes FAR more important to the men then it is to the women. It is only things that are on BOTH X chromosomes that are important to women.

--
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Too little, too late by macraig · 2009-09-02 08:21 · Score: 4, Insightful

We've already taken control of our own evolution, for better or worse:

"It is hoped that the findings may lead to new ways to reduce mutations and provide insights into human evolution."
Does anyone else see the conflict of interest inherent in that statement? This is what we humans do: we change the system before we even understand it. We try to "cure" autism before we even grasp its genetic or evolutionary significance.

"We are finally obtaining good reliable estimates of genetic features that are urgently needed to understand who we are genetically."
We won't ever be able to get an accurate answer to this question: we've already been busy contaminating the evidence. We worry about seeding Mars or other planets with terrestrial microbes before we get a chance to conclusively rule out independent signs of life, but we think nothing of poisoning our own genetic well before we even understand what's down there and why.
Re:May I opt out on the yellow spandex? by Adm.Wiggin · 2009-09-02 08:44 · Score: 5, Funny

It's funny how you add "(I bike to work.)" as if that makes it less weird. :)
Re:May I opt out on the yellow spandex? by Jurily · 2009-09-02 08:58 · Score: 4, Funny

Everyone knows you can't ride a bike in your regular clothes. You have to look like a total moron.
Re:May I opt out on the yellow spandex? by Lumpy · 2009-09-02 09:40 · Score: 4, Funny

It is ... now fishnets on the other hand are quite comfy....
Time to shock the family by dressing as Doctor Frank N furter again.....
Nothing like making the parents of children run screaming from the house during Halloween night.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:May I opt out on the yellow spandex? by mcpkaaos · 2009-09-02 10:43 · Score: 5, Funny

That sound isn't whistling. What you are hearing is actually laughter distorted by the Doppler effect.

--
It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.