Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

From The Scientist: Genome Reveals Clues to Giraffes’ “Blatantly Strange” Body Shape

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

An updated giraffe genome, published March 17, 2021 in Science Advances, reveals new insights into how the species accommodates a “blatantly strange body architecture.” 

Author, Amanda Heidt writes…

With their long necks, giraffes are a poster child for evolutionary oddities, but scientists know very little about the genetic underpinnings of such an extreme adaptation. An updated giraffe genome, published March 17 in Science Advances, reveals new insights into how the species accommodates what Rasmus Heller, an evolutionary geneticist at the University of Copenhagen and an author on the new study, calls a “blatantly strange body architecture.” Giraffe’s bones grow faster than any other animal, for instance, and the blood pressure required to pump blood up its six-foot neck would be fatal to humans.

Unlocking giraffeness 

When the team probed the genome further, they identified almost 500 genes that are either unique to giraffes or contain variants found only in giraffes. 

giraffe, genetics & genomics, CRISPR, gene editing, genome, physiology, hypertension, bone growth, techniques, mouse model

A functional analysis of these genes showed that they are most often associated with growth and development, nervous and visual systems, circadian rhythms, and blood pressure regulation, all areas in which the giraffe differs from other ruminants. As a consequence of their tall stature, for example, giraffes must maintain a blood pressure that is roughly 2.5 times higher than that of humans in order to pump blood up to their brain. In addition, giraffes have sharp eyesight for scanning the horizon, and because their strange bodies make it difficult for them to stand quickly, they sleep lightly, often standing up and for only minutes at a time, likely a result of changes during evolution to genes that regulate circadian rhythms.

Within those hundreds of genes, FGFRL1 stood out. In addition to being the giraffe’s most divergent gene from other ruminants’, its seven amino acid substitutions are unique to giraffes. In humans, this gene appears to be involved in cardiovascular development and bone growth, leading the researchers to hypothesize that it might also play a role in the giraffe’s unique adaptations to a highly vertical life. 

The Scientist

Note that seven amino acid substitutions needed to form a unique, functional gene is highly unlikely to occur naturally. Consider the following quote from Michael Behe:

Any particular adaptive biochemical feature requiring the same mutational complexity as that needed for chloroquine resistance in malaria is forbiddingly unlikely to have arisen by Darwinian processes and fixed in the population of any class of large animals (such as, say, mammals), because of the much lower population sizes and longer generation times compared to that of malaria…. (By “the same mutational complexity” I mean requiring 2-3 point mutations [amino acid substitutions]…)

Evolution News–Behe

Repeatedly, further research in a given field tends to reveal greater evidence for intelligent design, not less.

Comments
And if you can swallow a self-organization ratchet through random occurrences filtered through environmental and reproductive advantages...
Excellent, Querius. You at least mention the non-random element in evolution. You don't have to swallow it, but you are now able to criticize it more intelligently. Of course, the big next step is to be the first to propose a better mechanism for what we observe.Fred Hickson
June 1, 2022
June
06
Jun
1
01
2022
06:49 AM
6
06
49
AM
PDT
OK, now I see my disconnect. mm / cmET
June 1, 2022
June
06
Jun
1
01
2022
06:14 AM
6
06
14
AM
PDT
Wow. Q was discussing hydras and FredAlan is discussing polyps. Does anyone else see the disconnect?
Fred is referring to the cnidarian species Hydra vulgaris, commonly known as freshwater polyps.Fred Hickson
June 1, 2022
June
06
Jun
1
01
2022
06:05 AM
6
06
05
AM
PDT
By the way, how did you Hickson like my blog?
I already replied to that when you first asked.Fred Hickson
June 1, 2022
June
06
Jun
1
01
2022
06:04 AM
6
06
04
AM
PDT
Wow. Q was discussing hydras and FredAlan is discussing polyps. Does anyone else see the disconnect?ET
June 1, 2022
June
06
Jun
1
01
2022
05:50 AM
5
05
50
AM
PDT
Yes, it could be that Fred is not Alan Fox. But the evidence says that Fred is Alan Fox. So, if Fred isn't Alan, then Fred is doing a great impersonation of AlanET
June 1, 2022
June
06
Jun
1
01
2022
05:46 AM
5
05
46
AM
PDT
No, they were 20-25 cm (~8-10 inches) in total length, mostly the length of their tentacles.
I'm struggling to process this information, Querius, mainly due to the cube/square law. There's quite a bit in the literature about variation in polyp size and growth and the factors that affect it. 30 mm seems about as big as they get according to any source I've looked at. Increasing that from 1" to 10" is a thousand-fold increase in mass. This would be fascinating news to biologists.Fred Hickson
June 1, 2022
June
06
Jun
1
01
2022
05:34 AM
5
05
34
AM
PDT
Fred – why don’t you just tell us who you were previously? It was clear that you were a former commenter here from your first postings.
If that is clear there should be no need. The norm here is pseudonymity and I'm happy to go along with the norm.Fred Hickson
June 1, 2022
June
06
Jun
1
01
2022
05:21 AM
5
05
21
AM
PDT
Silver Asiatic @ 107, Yes. And if you can swallow a self-organization ratchet through random occurrences filtered through environmental and reproductive advantages, you can pretty much choke down everything else with liberal use of the coulda, mighta, and musta rationalizations. -QQuerius
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
07:11 PM
7
07
11
PM
PDT
Martin - yes, want to make it seem that way. The first trick is to say that anyone who doubts the theory obviously doesn't understand it. The first principle of evolutionary theory is "you must believe it is true". After that, everything works out very well for them.Silver Asiatic
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
04:51 PM
4
04
51
PM
PDT
SA,
Oh yes – and mutations are what built the proofreading and repair mechanisms to protect the organism against mutations
This was beautiful ... And we creationists/ID folks are the stupid ones, right ?martin_r
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
11:10 AM
11
11
10
AM
PDT
Fred
But the “science is baloney” seems a bit of a non sequitur.
This may explain why there's miscommunication at times. Here I'm just pointing to text - not the science. Just an exercise in reading for what was intended and what was there. First, Querius never said "science is baloney". Of course, we can paraphrase and summarize - that's fine. But what he actually said was "the baloney science" as was presented in his school textbook. It was just one, doctrinaire 'recipe' given for producing the hydras. The fact that the hydras starved to death using that method provide that particular science was baloney, and his own ingenuity, using some good science, helped the hydra to thrive. The textbooks will continue to give the less-effective method until someone corrects it. So this is just to point out ... maybe due to haste or misunderstanding ID motives or some other reason - but you completely misread what he said there. You did the same with me in your comment "God doesn't need puny ID". No, there wasn't a question mark on that - it was an assertion as if fact. So, sometimes I don't know what you're saying.Silver Asiatic
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
08:57 AM
8
08
57
AM
PDT
Fred Hickson @96,
Querius, you commented in that thread.
It brings up the interesting questions of consciousness and apparent free will. Many years ago, the General Electric Corporate Research & Development worked on artificial synapses and now, there's a software approach: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gn4nRCC9TwQ The programming in this case isn't hard-wired walking, but in the artificial learning. Same thing with Alpha-Zero that's clearly plays the best chess on the planet: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g9SlVdv1PY Note that intelligent minds programmed Alpha Zero to "evolve" its chess game by trial, error, and learning. This is similar to the role of epigenetics in organisms. Alpha Zero didn't program itself, and I would contend that neither did DNA or epigenetics. -QQuerius
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
08:56 AM
8
08
56
AM
PDT
Fred Hickson @94,
Is 25cm a typo? Did you mean 25mm?
No, they were 20-25 cm (~8-10 inches) in total length, mostly the length of their tentacles. It would be interesting to see what their maximum lengths might have reached if not limited by the diameter of the tank. If you want to repeat my experiment, keep the tank in a shady spot. Black paper behind it makes it easier to count them and see the lengths of their tentacles. -QQuerius
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
08:24 AM
8
08
24
AM
PDT
Fred - why don't you just tell us who you were previously? It was clear that you were a former commenter here from your first postings.Silver Asiatic
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
07:54 AM
7
07
54
AM
PDT
So how does the ID movement address the morphology and distribution of current species of whales and the fossil evidence found so far?
The most significant work that ID has done has been to show that whale morphology shows evidence of intelligent design and that blind, material, unintelligent natural causes could not be the explanation of the origin of whales.Silver Asiatic
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
07:51 AM
7
07
51
AM
PDT
martin_r
mutations ‘overlooked’ by all those checkpoints, proofreadings, repairs, genetic recombination etc, those ones created millions of species
Yes, exactly. Overlooked, blocked and if missed, the "creative work" they did is repaired and not allowed to do their magic. So why do the checkpoints, proofreading and repair mechanisms exist in the first place? Because the creative genius of mutations is so destructive that the organism cannot survive without them. Oh yes - and mutations are what built the proofreading and repair mechanisms to protect the organism against mutations. This is all supposed to make sense and be perfectly obvious to everyone.Silver Asiatic
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
07:48 AM
7
07
48
AM
PDT
FH
Why not?
Because their attempt to refute that was completely taken apart and that's a signal for them to not reply any further.Silver Asiatic
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
07:44 AM
7
07
44
AM
PDT
So how does the ID movement address the morphology and distribution of current species of whales and the fossil evidence found so far?
We are still waiting on how evolution by means of blind and mindless processes did it. But you, being an equivocator, just refuses to understand what is being debated. ID explains it as living organisms were intelligently designed with the information and ability to adapt and evolve.ET
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
06:30 AM
6
06
30
AM
PDT
Alan Fox is one of two or three people who promote the "niche environment is the designer" trope. He, like you, has only repeated the claim and never supported it. He, like you, equates evolution with evolution by means of blind and mindless processes. He, like you, refuses to understand that Intelligent Design is NOT anti-evolution. Meaning he, like you, is willfully ignorant of Intelligent Design and what evolutionists say.ET
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
06:27 AM
6
06
27
AM
PDT
Re Alan Fox Site Search (site:uncommondescent.com Alan Fox) got me this as first item: https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/giving-alan-fox-a-chance-to-set-the-record-straight/ Querius, you commented in that thread.Fred Hickson
May 31, 2022
May
05
May
31
31
2022
12:32 AM
12
12
32
AM
PDT
Hydra are indeed cool! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydra_(genus)Fred Hickson
May 30, 2022
May
05
May
30
30
2022
11:38 PM
11
11
38
PM
PDT
PS @ Querius Is 25cm a typo? Did you mean 25mm?Fred Hickson
May 30, 2022
May
05
May
30
30
2022
11:32 PM
11
11
32
PM
PDT
Querius I'm impressed. Both at your experimental skills at eleven and at your flexibility. "If it ain't working, try somethin' else". But the "science is baloney" seems a bit of a non sequitur. Your description is of an excellent bit of science.Fred Hickson
May 30, 2022
May
05
May
30
30
2022
11:11 PM
11
11
11
PM
PDT
Martin_r @90,
silly me … everybody knows, the deeper you dive the more females will like you …
Exactly. It doesn't matter how silly the speculation is--after all, it's just a speculation on something that's "not yet completely understood"--there's never any admission of ignorance. Researchers once found (no, I don't have the reference) that the frank admission of scientific ignorance to students created more interest in science disciplines. It presented a mystery that needed solving rather than revealing a weakness that might cause students to lose "faith" in science. Here's an example. When I was in high school, I thought hydra were cool. They were like some kind of mini-monsters. As a project, I tried to raise them according to the instructions--in a small covered Petrie dish with distilled water and a few drops of some chemical to discourage algae, I think. I introduced some daphnia for their food as the instructions indicated, and I waited for the carnage to begin. I was in high school, remember. But the hydra seemed to be afraid of them, withdrawing their tentacles when they came into contact. The hydra started getting smaller every day. The instructions said that hydra will sometimes go into "depression" for reasons not yet completed understood, but to try doing some things I don't remember. But they kept getting smaller, like little blobs and then disappeared. I was determined, so I made some hypotheses: - Hydra don't normally eat daphnia. - The hydra weren't "depressed" but rather they simply starved. - Distilled water isn't natural. - The Petrie dishes were too small. So . . . I cut the top off a large glass jug, filled it with pond water, added elodea along with daphnia and checked them every day. The results were astonishing! The hydra absolutely thrived! They reproduced mainly asexually by budding and their lengths, body and tentacles together, reached 20-25 cm, crisscrossing each other across the circular tank. Their tentacles were extremely thin and sparkly. They rarely withdrew their tentacles except when some wild daphnia crashed into them. I never saw any daphnia being ensnared, though I suppose it could be made to happen for biology text photos. I kept records of their increase in population stopping at 100 because it became too tedious. My conclusion was that the hydra were most likely feeding on protozoans. I learned a lot about observation, making hypotheses (although I changed several variables, not just one), and not just accepting what the instructions and a biology book claimed. My biology teacher also loved my experiment because it enabled him to trade a virtually endless supply of hydra all over the district for other lab stuff he needed. Of course, he never shared my secret. To this day, I still think hydra are cool and I still challenge baloney science. -QQuerius
May 30, 2022
May
05
May
30
30
2022
10:59 PM
10
10
59
PM
PDT
So how does the ID movement address the morphology and distribution of current species of whales and the fossil evidence found so far? Does it explain it? Or is it just "evolution sucks" and let's beat up those straw men"? Who's Alan Fox, btw? Google is no help.Fred Hickson
May 30, 2022
May
05
May
30
30
2022
10:12 PM
10
10
12
PM
PDT
Q, silly me ... everybody knows, the deeper you dive the more females will like you ...martin_r
May 30, 2022
May
05
May
30
30
2022
09:52 PM
9
09
52
PM
PDT
Martin and ET, You'll get no shortage of mighta/coulda/musta responses on how whales musta kept diving deeper for food or mighta been trying to get rid of parasites or coulda been engaged in dominance displays at extreme depths. -QQuerius
May 30, 2022
May
05
May
30
30
2022
05:36 PM
5
05
36
PM
PDT
Hickson, and exactly what does the science of biochemistry have to do with the just-so story-telling of Darwinian evolution?
"In fact, over the last 100 years, almost all of biology has proceeded independent of evolution, except evolutionary biology itself. Molecular biology, biochemistry, and physiology, have not taken evolution into account at all." - Marc Kirschner, founding chair of the Department of Systems Biology at Harvard Medical School, Boston Globe, Oct. 23, 2005 "Certainly, my own research with antibiotics during World War II received no guidance from insights provided by Darwinian evolution. Nor did Alexander Fleming's discovery of bacterial inhibition by penicillin. I recently asked more than 70 eminent researchers if they would have done their work differently if they had thought Darwin's theory was wrong. The responses were all the same: No. I also examined the outstanding biodiscoveries of the past century: the discovery of the double helix; the characterization of the ribosome; the mapping of genomes; research on medications and drug reactions; improvements in food production and sanitation; the development of new surgeries; and others. I even queried biologists working in areas where one would expect the Darwinian paradigm to have most benefited research, such as the emergence of resistance to antibiotics and pesticides. Here, as elsewhere, I found that Darwin's theory had provided no discernible guidance, but was brought in, after the breakthroughs, as an interesting narrative gloss. In the peer-reviewed literature, the word "evolution" often occurs as a sort of coda to academic papers in experimental biology. Is the term integral or superfluous to the substance of these papers? To find out, I substituted for "evolution" some other word – "Buddhism," "Aztec cosmology," or even "creationism." I found that the substitution never touched the paper's core. This did not surprise me. From my conversations with leading researchers it had became clear that modern experimental biology gains its strength from the availability of new instruments and methodologies, not from an immersion in historical biology.,,, Darwinian evolution – whatever its other virtues – does not provide a fruitful heuristic in experimental biology." - Philip S. Skell - (the late) Emeritus Evan Pugh Professor at Pennsylvania State University, and a member of the National Academy of Sciences. - Why Do We Invoke Darwin? - 2005 http://www.discovery.org/a/2816 Sociobiology: The Art of Story Telling – Stephen Jay Gould – 1978 – New Scientist Excerpt: Rudyard Kipling asked how the leopard got its spots, the rhino its wrinkled skin. He called his answers “Just So stories”. When evolutionists study individual adaptations, when they try to explain form and behaviour by reconstructing history and assessing current utility, they also tell just so stories – and the agent is natural selection. Virtuosity in invention replaces testability as the criterion for acceptance. https://books.google.com/books?id=tRj7EyRFVqYC&pg=PA530 “... another common misuse of evolutionary ideas: namely, the idea that some trait must have evolved merely because we can imagine a scenario under which possession of that trait would have been advantageous to fitness... Such forays into evolutionary explanation amount ultimately to storytelling... it is not enough to construct a story about how the trait might have evolved in response to a given selection pressure; rather, one must provide some sort of evidence that it really did so evolve. This is a very tall order.…” — Austin L. Hughes, The Folly of Scientism - The New Atlantis, Fall 2012
bornagain77
May 30, 2022
May
05
May
30
30
2022
04:30 PM
4
04
30
PM
PDT
Talking about whales ... I never understood biologists, why should something voluntarily dive into a depth of extreme pressure which destroys everything (unless it was designed to withstand such a pressure)...martin_r
May 30, 2022
May
05
May
30
30
2022
02:33 PM
2
02
33
PM
PDT
1 2 3 4 5

Leave a Reply