Some researchers wondered whether all that junk DNA supposedly left over from Darwinian evolution actually did something after all so they tested the idea:
Patches of seemingly meaningless DNA dotted throughout the genome might actually have a function: helping cells to survive starvation. Two studies published in Nature on 16 January suggest that these stretches of non-coding DNA called introns help to control the rate at which cells grow, conserving energy when food becomes scarce. Michael Marshall, “Cryptic DNA sequences may help cells survive starvation” at Nature
Not just “junk DNA” any moreat The Scientist either, it would seem:
Two studies contest the idea that the noncoding sequences are just “junk DNA,” demonstrating that they play important roles in the regulation of cell growth. Researchers have long puzzled over why many eukaryotic protein-coding genes are interspersed with segments of noncoding DNA that have no obvious biological function. These so-called introns are typically spliced out from their original sequence between transcription and translation and rapidly destroyed prior to protein production. Two studies published today (January 16) in Nature now reveal an unexpected role for introns, at least in yeast: many of them linger in the cells long after splicing, and play an important role in regulating cell growth under stressful conditions. Katarina Zimmer, “A New Role for Yeast Introns: Helping Cells Cope Under Stress” at The Scientist
Well, many researchers weren’t just “puzzled”!
It wasn’t so much that they were wrong but that they were smug and thought nothing of destroying careers for the cause. Make sure they don’t get to just forget that part.
See also: Humans may have only 19,000 coding genes
“Junk DNA” regulates regeneration of tissues and organs
Note: One junk DNA defender just isn’t doing politeness anymore. Hmmm. In a less Darwinian science workplace, that could become more a problem for him than for his colleagues.
Junk DNA can actually change genitalia. Junk DNA played the same role in defending Darwinian evolution as claims that Neanderthal man was a subhuman. did: The vast library of junk genes and the missing link made Darwin’s story understandable to the average person and the missing link even became part of popular culture. With Darwinism so entrenched, the fact that these beliefs are not based on fact will be difficult to root out of the culture. Darwin-only school systems are part of the problem.
At Quanta: Cells need almost all of their genes, even the “junk DNA”
“Junk” RNA helps regulate metabolism
Junk DNA defender just isn’t doing politeness any more.
Anyone remember ENCODE? Not much junk DNA? Still not much. (Paper is open access.)
Yes, Darwin’s followers did use junk DNA as an argument for their position.
Another response to Darwin’s followers’ attack on the “not-much-junk-DNA” ENCODE findings
Follow UD News at Twitter!