Joined: Sep. 2002
|Quote (REC @ Oct. 01 2010,15:57)|
My guess is Sal doesn't know what fixation means. He defines it as "Newly appearing good traits in a single individual will rarely get infused (or “fixed” ) into a population" and then goes on about likelyhoods of positive alleles evolving. Dumb. Didn't read the paper, did you? Anyway, there are a number of reasons why alleles might emerge, but not fix-vigor of a heterozygote, advantage of maintaining diversity, gene flow, etc....
And he is the most grotesquely self-congratulating idiot I've ever seen. My prediction confirmed in Nature, read it and weep. What a jackass....
Sal has had a bromance with Sanford for years. Sanford's lame book makes a big deal about a paper Lynch published expressing concern about mutational meltdown and the fitness of the human population. But what Sanford doesn't mention is work Lynch later did with Susan Estes, where they took lines of C. elegans, saddled them with huge detrimental mutational loads, and found that several lines actually recovered their original fitness levels. So much for genetic entropy. This paper provides a great slapdown when discussing genetic entropy with IDiots.
Estes S & M Lynch (2002). Rapid fitness recovery in mutationally degraded lines of Caenorhabditis elegans. Evolution 57(5): 1022-1030
Deleterious mutation accumulation has been implicated in many biological phenomena and as a potentially significant threat to human health and the persistence of small populations. The vast majority of mutations with effects on fitness are known to be deleterious in a given environment, and their accumulation results in mean population fitness decline. However, whether populations are capable of recovering from negative effects of prolonged genetic bottlenecks via beneficial or compensatory mutation accumulation has not previously been tested. To address this question, long-term mutation-accumulation lines of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, previously propagated as single individuals each generation, were maintained in large population sizes under competitive conditions. Fitness assays of these lines and comparison to parallel mutation-accumulation lines and the ancestral control show that, while the process of fitness restoration was incomplete for some lines, full recovery of mean fitness was achieved in fewer than 80 generations. Several lines of evidence indicate that this fitness restoration was at least partially driven by compensatory mutation accumulation rather than a result of a generic form of laboratory adaptation. This surprising result has broad implications for the influence of the mutational process on many issues in evolutionary and conservation biology.
Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it-- Confucius