Slashdot Mirror
Darwinian Evolution Considered As a Phase
LucidBeast tips a mind-bending report at New Scientist on the latest paradigm-breaking work of Carl Woese, one of whose earlier discoveries was the third branch of life on Earth, the Archaea. Woese and physicist Nigel Goldenfeld argue that, even in its sophisticated modern form, Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection applies only to a recent phase of life on Earth. Woese and Goldenfeld believe that horizontal evolution led to the rise of the genetic code itself. "At the root of this idea is overwhelming recent evidence for horizontal gene transfer — in which organisms acquire genetic material 'horizontally' from other organisms around them, rather than vertically from their parents or ancestors. The donor organisms may not even be the same species. This mechanism is already known to play a huge role in the evolution of microbial genomes, but its consequences have hardly been explored. According to Woese and Goldenfeld, they are profound, and horizontal gene transfer alters the evolutionary process itself."
The first 2 parts of Spore are like Horizontal Evolution, and the later parts are all vertical.
It makes perfect sense. Clearly Will Wright is a genius.
You know, scientists just keep reforming their ideas until it conforms to observable reality. How can they expect anyone to believe what they say when they're just going to keep changing their minds?
I prefer my religion. It allows me to conform reality to my ideas.
I pass on my genes horizontally
Watch those corners
For those who do not care to register for that New Scientist, we still have arXiv... :)
http://arxiv.org/abs/q-bio/0702015
Paul B.
Sincerely, the misinformed
Horizontal gene transfer has been known about for decades, and the notion that the root of the tree of life is more a tangle of interconnecting branches has pretty much been accepted for some time now.
Further it has nothing at all to do with Darwinism.
A mechanism of gene transfer plays no role in the "Survival of the Fittest" (a phrase coined not by Darwin, but rather by Spencer), or natural selection. Its not germane.
Natural Selection is a winnowing process, and a mutation amplifying force, but says nothing about the acquisition or dispersion of said mutations. It was never meant to.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
I fail to see the point of confusion.
Acquisition of a trait (by whatever means) would never amount to a significant percentage of the gene pool of an organism unless it proffered some usefulness. Mutation or horizontal genetic transfer are but mere mechanisms. Darwinism discusses the overall process, not the details.
How that transfer took place is mere details. When that transfer takes place is not fixed in time. Horizontal transfer still exists in larger and more complex organisms and their symbiotic partners.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
In other words, the tree of life is a banyan tree.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
I'm sorry, but I've never heard of this theory before, and I daresay I'm not the only one.
OK, here you go, then: Prokaryotes (i.e. bacteria, archea and so forth), by virtue of the comparatively "exposed" genetic material (not condensed or "bunched up" like ours typically is) and because of the structure of their cellular membranes, are very capable of "scraping up" any loose genetic material that may be lying around (e.g. as a result of cellular lysis). If these nucleic acids confer an evolutionary advantage, they are propagated in successive generations. This is why, and how "superbugs" like MRSA are thought to have evolved.
Microbiologists have used this feature for decades in the genetic engineering of bacteria to induce desired characteristics. The process is much harder and more complicated in eukaryotic (e.g. animal or plant) cells, but it can and does happen.