Jumping Genes Can Knock Out DNA; Alter Human Genome

[Teeburd105]

Would this have any affect on our assumptions about the
molecular clock?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/08/020809071852.htm

TonyK

[John Roth]

"Teeburd105" <teeburd105@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020812124824.03058.00004225@mb-mu.aol.com...
> Would this have any affect on our assumptions about the
> molecular
clock?
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/08/02080907-
> 1852.htm
>
> TonyK

Only if they weren't recognized as transpons, and were
misidentified as in-place mutations.

Unlike the original faux-paux with C14 dating, we've got
reasonably accurate external dates for enough speciation
events to know what the rate is - within 20% or so - assuming
it's constant, which has never been demonstrated.

The source of most inaccuracies is the relatively small amount
of data involved, and the fantastic leaps taken to reach
conclusions from it. More data solves much of those problems,
or it would if it didn't enable even more fantastic leaps to
conclusions.

John Roth

[Curtadams]

>Would this have any affect on our assumptions about the
>molecular clock?

><A
HREF="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/08/0208090718-
52.htm">http:
//www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/08/020809071852.htm</A>

>TonyK

Not really. If a gene jumps in or out you have a
nonhomologous section and it can't be for clocking. So you
use something else.

It does introduce a new opportunity for selection since most
jumping genes have preferences for the sequences they insert
into but that should be way too small to affect a clock.

Curt Adams (curtadams@aol.com) "It is better to be wrong than
to be vague" - Freeman Dyson

[Deowll]

"John Roth" <johnroth@ameritech.net> wrote in message
news:ulg7ph1itt3lbc@news.supernews.com...
>
> "Teeburd105" <teeburd105@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20020812124824.03058.00004225@mb-mu.aol.com...
> > Would this have any affect on our assumptions about the
> > molecular
> clock?
> >
> > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/08/0208090718-
> > 52.htm
> >
> > TonyK
>
> Only if they weren't recognized as transpons, and were
> misidentified as in-place mutations.
>
> Unlike the original faux-paux with C14 dating, we've got
> reasonably accurate external dates for enough speciation
> events to know what the rate is - within 20% or so -
> assuming it's constant, which has never been demonstrated.
>
> The source of most inaccuracies is the relatively small
> amount of data involved, and the fantastic leaps taken to
> reach conclusions from it. More data solves much of those
> problems, or it would if it didn't enable even more
> fantastic leaps to conclusions.
>
> John Roth
>
>
I know we don't have the same number of chromosomes as African
Apes. Has anyone figured out the details of when where and how
that happened? I would think the answer would be at least in
part yes but I don't have access to a university library.

[Howard R O]

>Subject: Jumping Genes Can Knock Out DNA; Alter Human Genome

>Would this have any affect on our assumptions about the
>molecular clock?
>
>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/08/020809071852.htm

I should think it would depending on the frequency of its
occurrence. If rare, it might average out, if not so rare
then your guess is as good as anyones.