Russell
Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005
|
| Quote | | Is that right, fellow evolutionists? |
Things will certainly tend in that direction. Since evolution almost invariably involves optimizing genes, and combinations of genes, you'll generally find that the initial mutation that enables survival of some previously insurmountable obstacle, like, say, an antibiotic, creates a situation that is suboptimal with respect to other aspects of survival and replication, and that here again mutations that improve that situation - without destroying the original antibiotic-survival mutation - will accumulate. There's nothing in theory, however, that says the bacterium would necessarily achieve the same replication rate (or whatever measure of fitness you choose) in the absence of antibiotic as one that doesn't carry the mutation in question. It might; it might not.
In my own personal experience, I have dealt with bacterial strains that differ only in the presence or absence of an antibiotic resistance gene. I have tried to measure a difference in their rate of replication with and without the antibiotic. If there is one, it's too small for me to detect.
But, once again, I'm not going to attempt to "shoot [afdave] down"; as far as I can see, he has yet to get off the ground.
--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.
|
