The Spanish National Cancer Research Center has begun a new project to map the human genome as use it as a timeline for understanding evolutionary processes. They hypothesize that "old" genes replecate first, while "newer" genes replicate last. In this way, they expect to be able to discern a relative mutation timeline based on the order of gene replication within the genome. The Research Center also posits that the older genes are safer from mutation because they are deeper within the genome, a product of their order in replication. Conversely, "new" genes are more likely to mutate (because they are towards the end of the genome), thus providing speciation within affecting the traits that are essential to life.
The hypotheses presented by the research center make a great deal of sense to me, and would go a long way towards explaining evolution and its relationship with genetics. My limited knowlege of the two subjects lead me unable to discern the credulity of their statements, but from my point of view they appear to be at least possible (if not extremely likely). I'd be interested in further evidence for these claims.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/11/131119101044.htm
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/521626/genomics-technology-races-to-save-newborns/
I'm a little confused about what constitutes a gene for being old or being new. In what context are they talking about age. I also don't understand how new genes are towards the end of the genome if they are new and why does being at the end make a gene more susceptible to mutating. This is very interesting and I agree with Joe I would like to see more evidence to support these claims.
ReplyDelete"New" and "old" here are reffering to evolutionary age, i.e when in history the gene entered that lineage. From my understanding, the newer genes towards the outside are more susceptible simply because they are more exposed, and vice-versa for older genes.
ReplyDelete