Monday, March 26, 2012

Argument - Mutations to Adaptions

Using the car analogy, Shenk explains that "a genetic defect causing a series of problems does not mean that the helathy version of that gene is single-handedly responsible for normal function" (25). So although there are many single-gene diseases that exist, little genetic fragments or changes in structure that may cause a few problems could potentially be an adaptation if GxE is true.

Based on what we know about genetics (Chapter 17 of Campbell), we already know that structure and function are closely related, but for how long do they have a direct effect on human development? In a GxE world, when does environment come into play? Could interdependence in nature affect our genes and mutations?

Agnes Kwon (akwon0215@gmail.com)

1 comment:

  1. Campbell states that "the genetic code is nearly universal, shared by organisms from...bacteria to...animals" (331). The flexibility of genes supports Shenk's argument to an extent: that genes by themselves play a very minimal role in development. Shenk references Patrick Bateson's work that clarified that "'genes...[code]...proteins...That is all'" (25). He changes the popular belief of DNA and how it was assumed that it solely dictated one's traits. Instead, both Bateson and Shenk downplay the belief of ardent Mendelian geneticists.

    I agree with Shenk in that a GxE world affects human development much more than biological processes. As Shenk further enforces, "genes are several steps removed from the process of trait formation" (25-6). Other scientific research supports this through twin studies. Identical twins will share the same genetic makeup, but even when living in the same house, vast differences are shown. An ABC report nearly mimics Shenk's findings. In it, scientists concluded that "biochemical reactions that turn...genes on and off are controlled by the environment," nearly mimicking Bateson's and Shenk's arguments. Therefore, genetic makeup can only play such a small role in real life contexts.

    ABC: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-10-12/study-finds-identical-twins-not-the-same/3554332

    Nathan Ro (nathanro94@gmail.com)

    ReplyDelete