RE: [asa] ORIGINS: pseudogenes are overwhelming evidence for evolution...?

I saw that article when it was first published as well but that is hardly
the mechanism by which humans and chimps share pseudogenes. These genes were
known to be formerly functional genes in a near relative, not bacteria.

Could God have specially created man with broken pseudogenes and copying
errors if He wanted to? Sure, just like He could have created a young earth
and just made it look old. But why?

Even Ken Ham rejects the appearance of age argument because he says that
makes God look deceptive and he's right on that one.

I think we just need to take our own advice and follow the evidence wherever
it leads and be prepared to accept the most likely interpretation of the
data without letting sentimental notions or theological hang-ups get in the
way.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Janice Matchett
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2007 2:32 PM
To: Dehler, Bernie; asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] ORIGINS: pseudogenes are overwhelming evidence for
evolution...?

At 01:02 AM 11/4/2007, Dehler, Bernie wrote:

 
"...Both the pseudogene and chromosome evidence for evolution were cited as
evidence by Dr. Francis Collins in his recent book. .." ~ Bernie Dehler

 @ You may my post of 9/13/2007 here to be of interest:

http://www.calvin.edu/archive/asa/200709/0318.html
Share Alike: Genes from bacteria found in animals - Patrick Barry

Some insects and roundworms pick up DNA from bacteria living within their
cells, new research shows.

The DNA transfer occurs in the animals' egg cells, so the genetic
modification passes between generations. The mechanism therefore provides an
alternative to mutation of existing DNA as a way for the species to acquire
new genetic traits.

Gene swapping is ubiquitous among bacteria and other single-celled
organisms. Even plants and fungi are known to occasionally adopt a piece of
foreign DNA. But scientists thought
that multicellular animals picked up genes from bacteria only rarely.

"Our data are indicating that [DNA transfer] is going on all the time," says
John H. Werren of the University of Rochester in New York, who led the
research team.

The discovery challenges the prevailing view of animal evolution, in which
genetic information is passed exclusively from parents to offspring. The
transfer of DNA from bacteria means that an individual could acquire and
pass on genes that it had not inherited.

"We're sort of on the edge of a transformation in the field" of animal
evolution, comments Laura A. Katz of Smith College in Northampton, Mass.
"These sorts of data allow us to redefine
the field to capture this other process going on."

Werren's team looked at several species of insects and roundworms infected
by a parasitic bacterium called Wolbachia pipientis, which afflicts about 20
percent of insect species as well as many other invertebrates. The bacterium
lives inside the animals' cells, including their egg cells, giving it ready
access to the chromosomes that are passed on to the animals'
offspring.

"I think that physical access is the key to allowing this [DNA transfer] to
happen," Werren says. The way in which animals' bodies insulate their eggs
and sperm from foreign bacteria is
the main barrier to heritable-DNA transfer in animals, he says.

The researchers compared the genetic code of the bacterium with the code of
11 other species: four roundworms, four fruit flies, and three wasps. The
team found that all but three of the
fruit fly species had segments of the bacterium's genetic code embedded in
their DNA. The report <http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1142490> appears
online and in an upcoming Science.

Some of this transferred DNA is active in the host species' cells, the
researchers found, but they didn't determine whether the genes serve a
biological function in the host.

The team also scanned an archive of published genomes for 21 other
invertebrate species and found bacterial genes in nine of them.

Such bacterial genetic code is routinely ignored during the sequencing of
animals' genomes because most scientists have assumed that the foreign DNA
is a sign of contamination,
Werren says. However, the new research rules out the possibility of
contamination, Katz says. "I think it's a really beautifully done, elegant
study."

Julie C. Dunning Hotopp, a member of the research team and a scientist at
the J. Craig Venter Institute in Rockville, Md., says that the mechanism by
which DNA leaves the bacteria and becomes inserted into the host species'
chromosomes remains uncertain.

While in-cell parasites such as W. pipientis are common among invertebrates,
none is known to infect people or other mammals, Werren says.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sun Nov 4 16:04:08 2007