Joined: Sep. 2006
|Quote (afdave @ Oct. 20 2006,13:16)|
|Mike PSS... |
DO they have the same number and type? I am not very familiar with the HLA gene yet ... feel free to enlighten me.
If the native americans have the same number and type of alleles expressed on the HLA gene (was it 500? for HLA-A) as south-asians, europeans, and africans (along with aboriginal australians) how did they acquire this number of mutations (490) in only 250 years (between the end of the UCGH flood and the end of the UCGH ice age) if you could only have 10 alleles from the survivors of the flood?
The native american population was ISOLATED from the rest of the world population from the end of the UCGH ice age to Columbus in 1492 (yeah, I know, Lief Ericsson in Labrador in 1100's but the geographic impact of that settlement has been measured and documented).
PLEASE ADDRESS THIS APPARENT DISCREPENCY IN YOUR ASSERTIONS.
I'm not a geneticist or biologist, but I can use Google. I highly reccomend it sometimes.
I searched for 'hla allele worldwide distribution' and started flipping through the pages. The 8th entry was Allele Project AlleleFrequency.net and looked promising. I clicked on the dbMCH Anthropology link and came to the front page I was looking for. In fact the abstract states (my bold)...
|The goal of the Diversity/Anthropology Component is to determine HLA class I and class II allele and haplotype frequencies in various human populations. Studies of allelic diversity in different populations can shed light on the evolution of HLA polymorphism as well as on the evolution and migration of human populations. In a clinical context, a knowledge of the allele frequency distributions in various populations is critical to the strategy of establishing and searching bone marrow donor registries as well as in studies of HLA-associated disease susceptibility.|
I clicked on the Pre-Defined Queries : Class I Allele Frequencies and lo-and-behold there is a table representing alleles and geographic distribution. To make sure they are talking about native populations I clicked on the 'Citation' reference below the North American geography and found that the samples taken were from native populations.
Now, looking at the table I see that for the alleles tested (NOTE: THERE ARE MORE ALLELES FOR HLA THAN WERE TESTED FOR) there is ~90% commanality in the HLA-A,B,and C alleles between North America and Europe/Asia/Africa.
What can I derive from this information as it relates to your UCGH presented so far? That the Native North American population acquired their HLA-A,B, and C allele variability BEFORE the ISOLATION of the North American population. Since this ISOLATION happened after the flood and immediately after the end of the UCGH ice age then there is only ~250 years that this quantity of allelic mutation could have occured in the population.
DAVE, THIS IS A LOT OF MUTATION IN ONLY 250 YEARS. HOW CAN WE ACCOUNT FOR THIS ALLELIC MUTATION RATE GIVEN THE ABOVE ALLELIC DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN POST-DILUVIAN POPULATIONS THAT WERE ISOLATED FROM EACH OTHER AFTER THE UCGH ICE AGE.
Does that answer your query?