Skip to comments.
Study, in a First, Explains Evolution's Molecular Advance
NY Times ^
| April 7, 2006
| KENNETH CHANG
Posted on 04/07/2006 9:54:33 AM PDT by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
Evolution of Hormone-Receptor Complexity by Molecular ExploitationAccording to Darwinian theory, complexity evolves by a stepwise process of elaboration and optimization under natural selection. Biological systems composed of tightly integrated parts seem to challenge this view, because it is not obvious how any element's function can be selected for unless the partners with which it interacts are already present. Here we demonstrate how an integrated molecular systemthe specific functional interaction between the steroid hormone aldosterone and its partner the mineralocorticoid receptorevolved by a stepwise Darwinian process. Using ancestral gene resurrection, we show that, long before the hormone evolved, the receptor's affinity for aldosterone was present as a structural by-product of its partnership with chemically similar, more ancient ligands. Introducing two amino acid changes into the ancestral sequence recapitulates the evolution of present-day receptor specificity. Our results indicate that tight interactions can evolve by molecular exploitationrecruitment of an older molecule, previously constrained for a different role, into a new functional complex.
1
posted on
04/07/2006 9:54:34 AM PDT
by
neverdem
To: PatrickHenry
2
posted on
04/07/2006 9:55:14 AM PDT
by
neverdem
(May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
To: neverdem
so, ah... you just feeling frisky, or do you actually *want* to get a whole lot of posts calling you a fool, a marxist, and a god-hater?
3
posted on
04/07/2006 10:18:13 AM PDT
by
King Prout
(The UN 1967 Outer Space Treaty is bad for America and bad for humanity - DUMP IT.)
===> Placemarker <===
4
posted on
04/07/2006 10:24:12 AM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(Interim tagline: The UN 1967 Outer Space Treaty is bad for America and bad for humanity - DUMP IT!)
To: neverdem
Charles Darwin wrote in The Origin of Species, "If it would be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." It's absolutely amazing that almost 150 years later using advanced science that Darwin could never have dreamed about, every new discovery only proves him right while a century and a half of nonstop distractions still haven't come up with the one single piece of evidence that would break his theory down.
5
posted on
04/07/2006 10:28:07 AM PDT
by
shuckmaster
(An oak tree is an acorns way of making more acorns)
To: shuckmaster
6
posted on
04/07/2006 10:30:42 AM PDT
by
hawkaw
To: King Prout
so, ah... you just feeling frisky, or do you actually *want* to get a whole lot of posts calling you a fool, a marxist, and a god-hater?With my tagline?
7
posted on
04/07/2006 10:33:32 AM PDT
by
neverdem
(May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
To: neverdem; Junior
8
posted on
04/07/2006 10:43:30 AM PDT
by
PatrickHenry
(Yo momma's so fat she's got a Schwarzschild radius.)
To: neverdem
understand how this system evolved at the molecular level The system is molecular, no doubt about it. They need to focus a little sharper on cell walls, or organelle walls, and less on DNA. The brain is in the cell wall, not the nucleus.
9
posted on
04/07/2006 10:45:46 AM PDT
by
RightWhale
(Off touch and out of base)
To: neverdem
Thanks for posting. The pp you cite in the response section is very underwhelming in terms of evolution. An "even more ancient ligand" for example. What does that mean?
These sort of variations where an amino acid or two change causes slight differences in orders of potency for related ligands is ubiquitous. I'll read this and again thanks for the post.
What was more interesting is they seem to be directly addressing Behe.
10
posted on
04/07/2006 10:48:34 AM PDT
by
tallhappy
(Juntos Podemos!)
To: neverdem
that sort of thing has never stopped the Raging Luddites yet.
11
posted on
04/07/2006 10:48:49 AM PDT
by
King Prout
(The UN 1967 Outer Space Treaty is bad for America and bad for humanity - DUMP IT.)
To: PatrickHenry
12
posted on
04/07/2006 11:08:01 AM PDT
by
neverdem
(May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
To: El Gato; JudyB1938; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Robert A. Cook, PE; lepton; LadyDoc; jb6; tiamat; PGalt; ..
13
posted on
04/07/2006 12:30:28 PM PDT
by
neverdem
(May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
To: shuckmaster
...while a century and a half of nonstop distractions still haven't come up with the one single piece of evidence that would break his theory down.You just wait. As soon as the guys at AIG raise a few hundred million dollars more, they will mount an expedition and find Noah's Arc.
14
posted on
04/07/2006 12:34:38 PM PDT
by
js1138
(~()):~)>)
To: js1138; grey_whiskers
I have houseguests this weekend, somebody remind me to read this when I have time :-)
Cheers!
15
posted on
04/07/2006 4:22:33 PM PDT
by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: neverdem
reusing and modifying existing parts origin?
16
posted on
04/07/2006 7:10:30 PM PDT
by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
To: LiteKeeper
origin?Evolution as a biological theory shows its utulity in explaining changes between proximal ancestors and descendants. It offers little to nothing about the origin of living creatures.
17
posted on
04/07/2006 10:44:10 PM PDT
by
neverdem
(May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
To: neverdem
Hmmm....this article starts with a completed cell. How did something more complex than anything man has every built just come into existence on a lifeless planet? The NYT is no more credible on the subject of science than it is on politics.
18
posted on
04/07/2006 11:54:01 PM PDT
by
Mogollon
To: neverdem
And that is it's nemesis. Scientists can boldly say that they have now "discovered" how the changes take place to make new, complex organisms. But they cannot say where the "parts" came from. There can't be an infinite regression. At some point, "matter" has to come into existence. And they can't explain where the information for the blueprints for the first "complex" organs came from. And they can't explain where the energy for assembling the complex organs came from.
Creationists say that there is a Creator God who created the first matter, energy, and information. An all-powerful personal God willed all of that into existence, in a useable complex form. Since that beginning, speciation has taken place, but within boundaries. That is not anti-scientific...no more so than saying many billions of years ago, at the Big Bang, all of the matter, energy, and information in the universe exploded from nothing, randomly, into existence. And all the complex systems of the universe assembled themselves.
That takes a lot of faith...more faith than I as a creationist can muster.
19
posted on
04/08/2006 9:51:19 AM PDT
by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
To: King Prout
...scientists have for the first time demonstrated the step-by-step progression of how evolution created...Evolution is their god?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-26 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson