RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (6) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Abiogenesis discussion thread, No trolls please, we're adults< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 26 2006,15:07   

Quote (skeptic @ Dec. 25 2006,21:38)
My question relates to conserved genes and specifically those that are conserved in vastly different species.  Is it the commonly held assumption that these genes are just remnants that are not expressed or are they actually active genes?  I'm thinking in terms of a conserved gene similar in both single-celled organisms and higher mammals.  Would they just be latent in the mammal or are they actually expressed and participate in some basic process?

I can't imagine that a gene that is not expressed or that otherwise serves no function would be conserved. A functionless gene would not be subjected to selection pressure, and therefore could mutate without restriction.

2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity

"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams

  177 replies since Dec. 15 2006,11:34 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (6) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]