First Lab Demonstration That the Ability To Evolve Can Itself Evolve

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Lab Demonstration That the Ability To Evolve Can Itself Evolve

Posted by Soulskill on Friday November 15, 2013 @06:06AM from the turn-their-evolvificating-up-to-11 dept.

ananyo writes "Research on Borrelia burgdorferi, the bacterium that causes Lyme disease, shows that the capacity to evolve can itself be the target of natural selection. B. burgdorferi can cause a chronic infection even if its animal host mounts a strong immune response — evading those defenses by tweaking the shape and expression of its main surface antigen, VIsE. A series of unexpressed genetic sequences organized into 'cassettes' recombine with the VIsE gene, changing the resulting protein such that it escapes detection by the host's immune system. The researchers studied the molecular evolution of the cassettes' genetic sequences in 12 strains of B. burgdorferi. They found that natural selection seemed to favor bacteria with more genetic variability within their cassettes, and hence a greater capacity to generate different versions of the antigen. 'Greater diversity among the cassettes in itself shouldn't be a selective advantage considering they aren't expressed and don't do anything else,' says lead author Dustin Brisson. 'But we did find evidence of selection, so the question is: what else could it be for besides evolvability?'"

14 of 72 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

All I know is... by SuperKendall · 2013-11-15 06:09 · Score: 3, Funny

My cassettes all migrated to CD's, and then from there to digital audio.
So extrapolating from that it seems the end game for all evolution is becoming beings of pure energy, DRM optional.

--
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
1. Re:All I know is... by Megane · 2013-11-15 06:42 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  My viruses are totally retro. They use 8-track tapes.
  
  --
  #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
2. Re:All I know is... by i+kan+reed · 2013-11-15 07:01 · Score: 2
  
  Matter-energy conversion principle says that you already are pure energy, just that some of that energy is expressed as mass.
evolution has no goal by peter303 · 2013-11-15 06:12 · Score: 2

According to the scientiific dogma. Given enough time it fills all ecologic niches, inlcuding intelligence and outer space space.
Common sense by JustNiz · 2013-11-15 06:16 · Score: 3, Insightful

It just seems common sense to me that if evolution can/does affect every mechanism in a living organism, then the mechanism governing the ability to evolve must itself be included.
1. Re:Common sense by abroadwin · 2013-11-15 06:21 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  You're right, it is common sense. My initial reaction to this was the same as yours. That said, it's very useful to verify common sense scientifically, because it's amazing how often common sense proves to be wrong when formally tested. Take nothing on faith, not even (and perhaps especially) the obvious.
Why is this suprising? by JoeyRox · 2013-11-15 06:17 · Score: 4, Insightful

Maybe I'm overlooking the significance of this discovery but why is it surprising that a bacteria strain with a greater "genetic variability" would fall under natural selection? Wouldn't such a strain naturally survive others considering it allows the bacteria to rearrange antigens and thus the ability to evade detection and destruction by the host's immune system, even if those latent facilities aren't immediately apparent to an observer who doesn't know the full evolutionary history of the strain?
1. Re:Why is this suprising? by robot_love · 2013-11-15 06:22 · Score: 2
  
  I always thought this was the acknowledged importance of sexual reproduction as well: It increases the variability.
  
  --
  .there is enough of everything for everyone.
2. Re:Why is this suprising? by vux984 · 2013-11-15 10:41 · Score: 2
  
  because history has given it reason to and it'll keep selecting for it until there's a stronger selection pressure to the contrary.
  No, that's not how evolution works.
  In rainy years, they all live. They all reproduce. And taller giraffes will not reproductively fare any better than shorter ones, everything else being equal.
  "Selection" is not a concious effort, nor even a subconcious effort, nor even an instinctual biological response at a cellular level. There is no "selection in anticipation" of some future.
  Really the organism does not "select" at all. Nature "selects" by literally killing off the less fit, inhibiting them from reproducing.
Re:Lab by HiChris! · 2013-11-15 06:24 · Score: 3, Informative

Wasn't Lyme disease created in a lab by humans, in Lyme, CT? I'm not sure this is the best example.
Um No. The area of Lyme/Old Lyme, CT is where is was identified. They didn't originally even know that it was a tick-born bacterial infection.
exactly_research 'begs the question' by globaljustin · 2013-11-15 06:25 · Score: 3, Insightful

if evolution can/does affect every mechanism in a living organism, then the mechanism governing the ability to evolve must itself be included.
yes.
these researchers created a *false distinction* in their research question
They took what you call 'the mechanism governing the ability to evolve' and found a behavior in nature that they could drive a false dichotomy wedge into to create a *factor* where none exists. Here is where they invent the distinction out of *thin air* based on their personal opinion:

'Greater diversity among the cassettes in itself shouldn't be a selective advantage considering they aren't expressed and don't do anything else,' says lead author Dustin Brisson.
highlighted portion is **pure speculation** and forms the leverage for their whole experiment...if that ***opinion*** by the research is wrong the whole thing sinks...and it is just that one dude's opinion...which is not how a scientific research question is formed
bottom line: the process they describe, the bacteria being selected b/c some are more likely to survive is absolutely 100% main line accepted theory...their work does not in any way represent a new or different behavior in life
disclaimer: I am not a creation science supporter...i hate it...but I also hate equally the notion that **science can prove God does or does not exist**...looking at bacteria to somehow 'prove' evolution makes 'god' a delusion is itself a delusion.
science cannot prove **OR** disprove something abstract like a supernatural 'god'

--
Thank you Dave Raggett
There's even a term for it: Requisite Variety by JoeyRox · 2013-11-15 06:28 · Score: 3, Informative

http://requisitevariety.co.uk/what-is-requisite-variety/
Re:Lab by Alsee · 2013-11-15 07:27 · Score: 4, Funny

Obama's Social Security Number begins 042, a which is only issued to Connecticut residents.
This Social Security Number was issued in the late 1970's.
Lyme Disease was first identified in Connecticut in.... you guess it... the late 1970's.
Coincidence? I THINK NOT!
Obviously Obama created Lyme Disease in a lab in the 1970's, as part of his plan to manufacture fake evidence of evolution, to turn Americans away from God, to ensure he'd be able to usurp the Presidency of the United States after the new Millennium arrived.
-

--
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Re:For A Better World by Kahlandad · 2013-11-15 10:00 · Score: 2

Paradoxically, that would require a miracle.