Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Startling Result–90% of Animals Less than 200 kya

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

From PhysOrg this morning, in a study using “DNA bar-codes” (mitochondrial DNA, using a specific gene COI) and conducted around the world, here’s the verdict:

The study’s most startling result, perhaps, is that nine out of 10 species on Earth today, including humans, came into being 100,000 to 200,000 years ago.

“This conclusion is very surprising, and I fought against it as hard as I could,” Thaler told AFP.

The scientists can’t figure out what might have caused this. They ask:

Was there some catastrophic event 200,000 years ago that nearly wiped the slate clean?

Maybe a “flood”?

About “bar-codes” there’s this:

On the one hand, the COI gene sequence is similar across all animals, making it easy to pick out and compare.

On the other hand, these mitochondrial snippets are different enough to be able to distinguish between each species.

“It coincides almost perfectly with species designations made by specialist experts in each animal domain,” Thaler said.

IOW, this method works, unlike, say, ‘phylogenetic trees’!

Here’s the actual article. I haven’t had time to read it.

Enjoy!

Comments
AK: Different methods.PaV
May 28, 2018
May
05
May
28
28
2018
12:01 PM
12
12
01
PM
PDT
IOW, this method works, unlike, say, ‘phylogenetic trees’!
Maybe I am missing something, but are they not talking about a phylogenetic tree?Allan Keith
May 28, 2018
May
05
May
28
28
2018
10:46 AM
10
10
46
AM
PDT
I have been arguing just that for a long while. A new "tree of life" will be shown through genetics. Also shows stasis and clear separation of species.buffalo
May 28, 2018
May
05
May
28
28
2018
10:17 AM
10
10
17
AM
PDT
polistra:
Conclusion: The mitochondrial patterns aren’t a driving variable. They’re a secondary result, or a signal, of changes that don’t really affect speciesness.
Then how do you explain the fact that the 'DNA bar-codes' match the species definitions of paleontologists. That is, matching mitochondrial DNA to species looks to be a 'best-fit,' unlike phylogenetic trees. The mt-DNA almost seems to be the 'best' definition of species. Any thoughts?PaV
May 28, 2018
May
05
May
28
28
2018
09:13 AM
9
09
13
AM
PDT
Hmm. We have a wide variety of artifacts (tools, paintings, etc) that are reliably dated back to 1.5 million years BC, using a variety of dating methods. But the current mitochondrial patterns have been stable for only 200k. Conclusion: The mitochondrial patterns aren't a driving variable. They're a secondary result, or a signal, of changes that don't really affect speciesness.polistra
May 28, 2018
May
05
May
28
28
2018
08:32 AM
8
08
32
AM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply