News Tree of life

Researchers: Jumping genes make the Tree of Life a bush

Spread the love
schoolbook Darwinism model of evoution/Yury Zap, Fotolia

As opposed to a circle, or in the case of prokaryotes, a forest? Matchwood?

From ScienceDaily:

Less than a year ago, a consortium of some hundred researchers reported that the relationship between all major bird clades had been mapped out by analysing the complete genome of around 50 bird species. This included the exact order in which the various lineages had diverged.

Since then, two of the members of the consortium, Alexander Suh and Hans Ellegren at the Uppsala University Evolutionary Biology Centre, have expanded upon this model by analysing the avian genome through a new method, which hinges on so-called ‘jumping genes’. Their results paint a partially contrasting picture of the kinship between the various species.

By using the jumping genes, or so-called retrotransposed elements, the Uppsala researchers have found that, for instance, a cuckoo can be more closely related to a hummingbird than a pigeon in a certain part of its genome, while the opposite holds true in another part. The study found numerous examples to corroborate the existence of the phenomenon.More.

In addition to jumping genes, horizontal gene transfer shows that evolution is not necessarily linked to common ancestry. In other words, the assumed link between evolution and common ancestry, enforced via Darwinism in the schools, is simply not an accurate picture of the history of life.

The fallout from that will be a long time falling, though. Methinks I hear Darwinyelps already.

See also: Maybe biological classification is more of an art exhibit than a science pursuit

Debate!: Tree of life? Forest of life? What about matchwood?

and

Horizontal gene transfer: Sorry, Darwin, it’s not your evolution any more

Follow UD News at Twitter!

9 Replies to “Researchers: Jumping genes make the Tree of Life a bush

  1. 1
    ppolish says:

    Jumping Genes are not “NS” or “RM” or “Drift” or “Niche”.

    Jumping is guided and directed and purposeful however.

  2. 2
    Zachriel says:

    The phenomenon is called incomplete lineage sorting, and is a direct result of standard evolutionary processes when a lineage branches rapidly, such as during the radiation of neoavian birds.
    http://www.nature.com/nrg/jour.....07_F3.html

    It’s arithmetic!

  3. 3
    wd400 says:

    In addition to jumping genes, horizontal gene transfer shows that evolution is not necessarily linked to common ancestry. In other words, the assumed link between evolution and common ancestry, enforced via Darwinism in the schools, is simply not an accurate picture of the history of life.

    I’m guessing you didn’t read the paper…

  4. 4
    ppolish says:

    “Single Common Ancestor” would be a bad design. Creation happened in plurals with mega “go forth & multiply” drive. That’s a good design.

  5. 5
    PaV says:

    From the conclusion of the paper:

    Even if one of these genome-scale bifurcating trees reflects the actual neoavian species tree, the verification of such a phylogenetic hypothesis remains challenged by the underlying complex discordances. Finally, the nearly star-shaped topology of this super-radiation (Figs 4A and 5D) may reflect population complexity of the ancestral species, especially if the succession of population isolation during explosive speciation happened in disagreement with prior population structure [40,41].

    “Star-shaped” topology of a [super]-radiation? Really? This can’t be good for population genetics, nor for Darwinism.

  6. 6
    PaV says:

    There’s more:

    From the conclusion:

    Our study thus provides empirical evidence for a locally confined “hard” polytomy [41], and we predict that future genome-wide studies of ILS in other adaptive radiations will reveal further examples where a fully bifurcating, universal species tree is an oversimplification of the underlying complexity of speciation.

    Say it isn’t so!! No Darwinian tree!~! Egads. What’s the world coming to???

  7. 7
    Bob O'H says:

    “Star-shaped” topology of a [super]-radiation? Really? This can’t be good for population genetics, nor for Darwinism.

    Why not? Population geneticists won’t have a problem with it – coalescence theory shows that you can get this in a panmictic population with a rapidly expanding population.

    In this case, it may be more because of rapid speciation, as a result of a lot of other dinosaurs dying out.

    I guess I should read the paper, after I’ve cleaned out our own birds.

  8. 8
    wd400 says:

    Say it isn’t so!! No Darwinian tree!~! Egads. What’s the world coming to???

    Yes, a tree with multifurcations would be utterly opposed to Darwin’s ideas…
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_life_(biology)#/media/File:Darwin_Tree_1837.png

    (the tree that’s the only figure in the The Origin has multifurcations too. The meaning of these “hard polytomies” and the possibility they are real rather than an artifact of our ability to recover ancient bifurcations is a classic question in phylogenetics, for what it’s worth).

  9. 9
    ppolish says:

    Darwin’s “Tree Doodle” is about as helpful and accurate as “Celestial Spheres” with heavenly bodies hanging from them. Get serious WD400.

Leave a Reply