Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

James Shapiro: Genetic recombination is not random

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Like you were probably taught in school

At the Huffington Post, Microbiologist James Shapiro has been helping readers “see past Darwin,” to use James Barham’s term, for some time now. Here are two recent entries:

Take 2: (08/07/2012) Why Genetic Recombination Is Not Random, and How Cells Take Advantage of Non-randomness:

In the pre-DNA era, students were all taught that genetic change is random and accidental. Because the molecular details were inaccessible, this was the default assumption. But once we learned about DNA carrying hereditary information, we could research the details of how changes occur. We no longer needed to assume. We could investigate.

One of the main topics in molecular genetics has been the process of recombination between homologous chromosomes. This process makes it possible to construct genetic maps showing the relative positions of markers along the chromosomes.

Homologous recombination is not accidental. It is a required part of the special cell divisions called “meiosis” that that produce sperm and egg cells with only one copy of each chromosome. Without meiosis, sexual reproduction would not be possible as found today in higher organisms.

Legitimate and Illegitimate Recombination: Targeting Homologous Exchange for Multiple Adaptive Purposes:

“Legitimate recombination” was assumed to be reasonably uniform in the early days of genetics. That was the basis of constructing genetic maps. We now know homologous recombination can be used “illegitimately” (i.e. targeted either positively or negatively). I think the molecular studies are remarkable in uncovering a striking variety of ways cells have adapted homologous recombination for diverse purposes. As the recent mouse paper shows, we have only begun to scratch the surface of what promises to be a rich vein of cellular inventiveness.

Comments
For Shapiro, “random” means that all combinatorially possible recombinations should be equally probable. For most biologists, “random” means that the recombination are not biased toward producing beneficial variants.
Wrong. For Shapiro, the specific loci along the sequence where recombination may occur is controlled in order to avoid “bad outcomes” and promote specifically beneficial outcomes. He uses terms like “this benefits” and “is advantageous” in order to illustrate his point. Which, of course, would mean that control is “biased toward producing beneficial variants”.Upright BiPed
August 8, 2012
August
08
Aug
8
08
2012
01:45 PM
1
01
45
PM
PDT
When evolutionary biologists say that it is random, what they mean by "random" is different from what Shapiro means by "random" when he says that they are not random. For Shapiro, "random" means that all combinatorially possible recombinations should be equally probable. For most biologists, "random" means that the recombination are not biased toward producing beneficial variants. As used in the mathematical theory of probability, "random" does not imply equally probable, unless the underlying probability distribution is a uniform distribution. There's less disagreement here than meets the eye.Neil Rickert
August 8, 2012
August
08
Aug
8
08
2012
01:22 PM
1
01
22
PM
PDT
somewhat related note to “meiosis” 'simple' mitosis (cell division) is simply fascinating to watch:
DNA - Replication, Wrapping & Mitosis - video (notes in description) http://vimeo.com/33882804
bornagain77
August 8, 2012
August
08
Aug
8
08
2012
08:55 AM
8
08
55
AM
PDT
Dr Lee Spetner said recombinations are not random in his book "Not By Chance" (1997). Nice to see some people are finally catching up.Joe
August 8, 2012
August
08
Aug
8
08
2012
08:43 AM
8
08
43
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply