Skip to comments.The genetic puppeteer (ever wonder why genetic twins look progressively different over time?)
Posted on 02/18/2009 8:49:26 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
The genetic puppeteer
by David White
Back in 2005 a group of researchers published a landmark study on a question that has long puzzled geneticists: why arent identical twins
identical? Considering that they have the same DNA sequence in each of their cells, it seems a bit strange that they often possess a number of physical differences, such as different fingerprints, and different susceptibilities to disease. This raises the question: if two people can have identical DNA sequences and yet be so different, is there more to our genetic blueprint than just DNA?...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationontheweb.com ...
Heredity isn’t everything.
Don’t have my ping list handy. Any of you guys happen to have a ping list handy?
All the best—GGG
Environment definitely has something to do with it. As it turns out, they are discovering codes upon codes upon codes above the genetic code.
I work in a cancer research lab and we do a lot of epigenetics work! Thanks for posting this it is a good, informative read!
Not exactly the same thing, but definitely related:
ping to #6
Glad to be of service!—GGG
As you get older, who you are gets written on your face.
Heredity isnt everything.<<
It apparently starts in the pre-birth environment - the finger prints are apparently extremely similar but slightly different. Apparently difference in nutrition, womb position and blood pressure have slight effects on fingertip growth rate and thus cause tiny fingerprint differences.
Later in life environmental differences are even bigger - and things like lines in the face and body weight can diverge even more.
Fascinating topic though.
Because creationism predicted they would.
Very true. And, as it turns out, part of what is written on your face is controlled by the epigenetic code.
Ping to another layer of complexity.
Lots of reasons... environmental stresses (weather, sun exposure, work activity), physiological stresses (sickness, exposure to toxins, epigenetics, etc.
If you want to read a few papers that will really blow your mind, give the following a read!
Life’s Irreducible Structure pt. 1
Life’s Irreducible Structure pt. 2
Astonishing DNA Complexity Demolished neo-Darwinism
For some reason your vid isn’t playing. Is there a different link to the same.
Nope...I think you just need to right-click on it and “Save As...” then watch it off of your hard drive. I guess it doesn’t stream well in your browser.
What’s your OS and browser?
Vista and Explorer.
Hmmm, don’t know why it won’t stream...but can you download it then play it? (it’s really awesome, BTW)
It just started playing. Boy did that thing take a long time to load. Thanks for the link!
I wouldn't describe identical twins as "so different."
It's lost on me why the author thinks it is news that a variety of factors affect gene expression.
You might be onto something there. My brother and I shared the same womb. I weighed one pound more at birth and through life I've always been 10+ pounds heavier.
Another thing, while in the womb, we decided to be just adorable... some things never change. :)
Read the third one. So much misinformation or misunderstanding. Do the author and editors of that “journal” know the definition of references, because it has footnotes AND references in it.
Funny thing, with epigenetics, maybe Lamarckianism looks to be vindicated in a very limited, highly qualified way, after all.
And another funny thing, there was a lot of tasty scientific goodness in that article without much fundamentalist preaching! I sure hope the good people at CMI are feeling well.
It’s not just some generic factor. The epigenetic code actually controls the genetic code. And, as it turns out, they are finding additional codes that make the genetic code perhaps the simplest code of them all.
Fire away. I’m all ears.
Most of this stuff in this article has been known for years. The UTRs he mentioned are called introns. They were discovered over 30 years ago. The people who found them won a Nobel in 1993 or 1994. Where I worked then was lucky enough to had booked one of the winners for a lecture that was scheduled the week after he won. The entire genome is not transcribed. A lot of stuff like that from someone without a firm grasp of the field. The author is a botanist that spent a lot of time doing missionary work, not someone with a molecular biology background.
About the DNA replication, I actually developed a method (about 20 years ago) to map which regions had replication origins and in which directions the DNA replicated. Other labs used my method soon after to show that DNA replication occurred in nonspecific regions in human DNA. Again, what is your background or his in molecular biology???
Wow, wrong right out of the box. You are obviously an expert. LOL
PS Could it be that you don’t know the difference between transcription and translation? I think I’ll stick with the botanist/missionary.
The way the author describes UTRs in the article, he makes no distinction between the 5’ and 3’ UTRs and introns. Both were known even before introns. It was known that there had to be regions 5’ (upstream) where the translation machinery (ribosomes and associated proteins) had to bind to start synthesizing proteins. More recently it was found that the 3’ end contains sequence motifs (not necessarily specific bases) to tell the cell to stop transcription . These are likely the 3D structure the mRNA makes and not specifically the sequence. You have this idea that this “ancient” history is somehow new. None of this repudiattes evolution at all.
Wrong again. Williams’ paper is covering recent and groundbreaking discoveries by project ENCODE. Next time you say you have read something, you might want to consider actually reading it. The “ancient history” (the only part you apparently read) is covered at the beginning of the paper. Williams then goes on to demonstrate how our antiquated notions with respect to the genome have been RADICALLY changed by project ENCODE.
PS Way to NOT admit your error.
`What is my error snoogums?
Introns are also UTRs. They are transcribed, but not translated. UTR in the field means UnTranslated Regions. DNA is transcribed to RNA and then the RNA is translated to protein. He said that.
It seems that you don’t know what transcription and translation are.
Again, what is your biology background snoogums??
PSS What do you suppose the discovery that the genome is 93%+ functional will do to all those phylogenetic trees that the Darwinists have constructed based on a neutral rate of mutation?
Oh, I get it. You start using “snoogums” as a defense mechanism when a creaionist points out you don’t know what you’re talking about. LOL
Simply explained with creationism.
Spare me your belated understanding. You obviously have no clue what you’re talking about. Goodnight Mr. “Scientist.”
Most of the function of the non transcribed regions is due to the macro structure of the DNA. Mutations in the DNA will likely not affect the structural functions until enough are accumulated. If enough do, then the they may cause the cell to not replicate and die off or they may actually allow a new and possibly beneficial function to occur. If this new function is beneficial, then the organism will survive and be able to pass on it’s genes to it’s organism, having evolved a little.
Bump for later reading as a father of identical twins.
They are almost to the age where they are done losing their baby teeth. They lose (and grow) in a mirror image of each other - every single tooth! (Upper right for one, upper left on the other, etc.)
But yes - different in so many ways. The oldest was a natural birth. The second was an emergency “c-section” with the cord wrapped around her neck. Born 10 weeks premature. Neither had any real complications though. Interesting that the second one (with no air/heart beat) is now about 1/2 inch taller and a couple of pounds heavier. Although at birth I think she was a half - ounce bigger than her sister (IIRC: 3 lbs 4 oz and 3 lbs 4.5 oz).
It was known for a long time that the majority of the DNA had some function. What is new is what exactly that is.
I’m believing that it’s pointless to argue with ignorant people who have no intention of believing facts.
It got under your skin last night. Do you have latent homosexual feelings???
Again, ignorance is bliss soongams.
Identical twins = nature’s clones.
Your ignorance becomes more and more apparent with each new reply. Have you still not read the paper? Don’t you realize that they now know that each segment of DNA can have multiple functions, and thus a single mutation can have a profound effect on each and every one of them? Read the article. You are WAY behind the times...and believe me, it shows.
The upshot is that epigenetics plays a big part in shaping the individual beyond the initial genetic constitution.
Wrong again. The Darwiniacs labeled 97% of the genome as leftover “junk” from our evolutionary past. Creationists and IDers have long argued that the designer would not create a genome that is mostly junk, and predicted that function would be found for the same. As per usual, the creationists got it right, and the Evos were dead-wrong.