tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3643556495084083743.post4904366643257708448..comments2022-12-09T08:52:54.666-08:00Comments on Skeptic Wonder: Awesome talks on cellular evolutionPsi Wavefunctionhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10829712736757471647noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3643556495084083743.post-90727089838945900812010-03-13T17:47:17.340-08:002010-03-13T17:47:17.340-08:00Allan, I and many other agree strongly with the ne...Allan, I and many other agree strongly with the need to put the organism back into evolutionary biology -- it seems that not only popgen people are the culprits here, but also molecular evolutionary biologists who seldom see life aside from a few strings of nucleic/amino acids. <br /><br />And yes, selection and drift act <i>in tandem</i>, a point that seems to be often missed. Personally, I favour more selectively neutral explanations, just because self-organisation and drift and such are lower-level explanations than selection, and thus preferrable if they work. But there are obviously cases that cannot be explained by drift alone (which, by the way, doesn't ever act completely in isolation of selecetion), and that's where you evoke selection-based mechanisms. In that order. <br /><br />It is good to discuss both approaches, but I get really pissed off by a complete dismissal of selection or drift, particularly the latter. Some loud evolutionary biologists, like Dawkins and Coyne, tend to utterly downplay the importance of neutral processes in their popularisations. And that I believe is misleading and wrong.Psi Wavefunctionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10829712736757471647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3643556495084083743.post-86633321574955687122010-03-11T04:49:40.869-08:002010-03-11T04:49:40.869-08:00Cellular evolution - does that mean what I think i...<i>Cellular evolution - does that mean what I think it means? As in finally a bit of a break from the geneticists trying to steal the scene ... </i><br /><br /><i>Yes, apparently, organisms aren't just DNA sequences on a computer screen! *shock* </i><br /><br />OTOH, "Nothing in Evolution makes sense except in light of Population Genetics" (Lynch, 2007). (To which I might add: "nothing in Population Genetics makes sense ..." ;0). )<br /><br />Joking - but I would like to see a bit more meat on this issue. A slow day in the blogosphere regularly brings out a rash of worshipful references to Spandrels and demolition of Dawkinsian stances, often from a pop-genetic standpoint. I don't doubt the importance of drift, but that "just-cos" story is on precisely equal footing with any given "just-so" story. Appeals to population size alone ignore the fact that populations are taken over by geometrical travel of genes, not by population-wide free association assisted by one of those little whirly magnet things. I'd certainly welcome moves to put a bit of the 'biology' back into 'evolutionary biology'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3643556495084083743.post-41085285450194900972010-03-10T04:54:44.998-08:002010-03-10T04:54:44.998-08:00Awesome talk!
Great that he paid attention to the ...Awesome talk!<br />Great that he paid attention to the important issue that homology does not necessarily imply orthology (nice example of introns in plants and animals), since I have the feeling many molecular biologists seem to skip over this.<br /><br />Also made me realize that there's a lot of work to do in bridging disciplines. And I think there's a lot of knowledge out there waiting to be revived and framed into current-day perspective. Basically, that's good news for us right ;)?Lucas Brouwershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15192035237302508309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3643556495084083743.post-52299643053260839242010-03-10T02:08:29.156-08:002010-03-10T02:08:29.156-08:00Yes, apparently, organisms aren't just DNA seq...Yes, apparently, organisms aren't just DNA sequences on a computer screen! *shock* <br /><br />Slowly re-discovering that little detail. I wonder if one could carve out an awesome academic career simply reviving stuff from the 60's and 70's, the long gone days of actual biology...oh, did I say that outloud? Shit.<br /><br />Disclaimer: I love genomics and molecular biology and believe it has a LOT to offer for other fields. It's just that we humans are a little to obsessive at times, and neglect stuff...<br /><br /><br />I've been too busy to blog lately, so not too many protists to catch up on. Hopefully not too disappointing... >_>Psi Wavefunctionhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10829712736757471647noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3643556495084083743.post-82455069255174196942010-03-09T23:40:19.890-08:002010-03-09T23:40:19.890-08:00Cellular evolution - does that mean what I think i...Cellular evolution - does that mean what I think it means? As in finally a bit of a break from the geneticists trying to steal the scene and an acceptance that lipids, proteins, and intracellular componants can all be selected for and play a part in adaptation? Awesome if so. :D<br /><br />I have so many of your protists to catch up on! I'm in my last week of project atm, so insanely busy trying to actually get some results...Lab Rathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07962574174521597312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3643556495084083743.post-41140679961916558962010-03-06T01:57:00.982-08:002010-03-06T01:57:00.982-08:00"Neutralism vs. Selectionism is a false dicho...<i>"Neutralism vs. Selectionism is a false dichotomy, btw"</i><br /><br />Quite right. I posted similar in response to Larry Moran's 1000th post on the topic. But even casting it that way is being 'stuck in an adaptationist mindset', apparently - seeing everything as a variation on adaptation, with neutrality being the bit that doesn't have any. <br /><br />I think, on either side, it is often a strawman argument. No-one is the polar opposite of whatever position you yourself happen to hold. <br /><br />Moran's with you on neutrality being the 'superior' default position, of course. Me, I <i>like</i> a bit of adaptationist storytelling.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com