A new model developed at Tel Aviv University offers a possible solution to the scientific question of why neutral sequences, sometimes referred to as “junk DNA,” are not eliminated from the genome of living creatures in nature and continue to exist within it even millions of years later.
According to the researchers, the explanation is that junk DNA is often located in the vicinity of functional DNA. Deletion events around the borders between junk and functional DNA are likely to damage the functional regions and so evolution rejects them. The model contributes to the understanding of the huge variety of genome sizes observed in nature. – Tel-Aviv University, February 22, 2023
“and so evolution rejects them”? … So evolution has foresight? This could be an allegorical statue, featuring Evolution rejecting Junk DNA…
In any event, seriously, there are tons of science news stories out there about “junk DNA” that turned out to be functional. There are 252 stories on the topic here at Uncommon Descent alone.
Maybe we don’t need a new theory about how evolution acts like an intelligent person so much as a new approach to the whole topic.
The paper is open access.
7 Replies to “Why “junk DNA” sequences are not deleted: Because Evolution, we are told, “rejects them””
Did I get this right ?
Do these Darwinists really suggest, that to delete some data around borders might be too risky ? :))))))))
Does blind natural process (where is no foresight) know what is too risky ? :))))))
These people aren’t normal … that is for sure … Do they ever listen to what they suggest ?
Somewhere between zero and one hundred percent of non-coding DNA has function.
We do not know the percentage. For those who say that’s it’s 100 percent, there are much bigger genomes than humans. Are they all functional too?
So that leaves us with the question that the non functional DNA must have been designed or part of the plan by the creator? What was it?
Clearly, a cell is an extreme engineering. A system that survived for billions of years has to be. It is something beyond human comprehension. Of course, it has to be that complex. A technology that 3D-prints (from scratch) autonomous “humanoid robots” has to be that complex. It can’t be otherwise. As for 2023, this technology is an engineering SCIFI.
So it is very possible, that we will never understand … it is possible, that you have to have some higher knowledge in order to understand this technology … and it is very possible, that humans will never have this higher knowledge.
PS: From engineering point of view, would it be possible, that there are “junk” DNA sequences that have one-time function for a very short period of time and then never again ?
But we know a lot and continue to learn more.
The mantra here should be “follow the evidence” just as “follow the money” is always a good idea. People are so afraid of the evidence on either side that the obvious gets ignored.
Aside: There is zero evidence in this world that does not support ID.
Aside 2: People who deny evidence are ceding the stage to anti ID proponents when it’s not necessary.
Aside3: Making fun or derogatory remarks about people who reject ID is a loosing strategy. Take apart their arguments or mock the arguments if necessary. But not those who hold them. Eventually they have to be ignored while still defending what is based on evidence and logic.
you haven’t answered/commented on this:
PS: the problem with Darwinists is, that they always misrepresent their findings …
From an engineering standpoint, you don’t add anything to a system that does not require it. The fake line about “follow the evidence” actually means “hide the evidence” in this case. More and more functionality is being ‘discovered’ by researchers that ignored the fake idea that any part of DNA is junk.
Yes it is definitely possible.
It’s also possible that a process that has many uses continues on after its time of usefulness and results in things that have no use. Meanwhile, people investigate a lot of things that seem useless. We should encourage that.