Squid Nervous System RNA Editing Challenges NeoDarwinism



The article "Transcripts in the Squid Nervous System Are Extensively Recoded by A-to-I RNA Editing" by Alon et al. challenges neo darwinism in two ways. First, it shows that RNA editing can generate a vast amount of protein diversity from a single DNA sequence. This challenges the neo darwinist view that evolution is driven primarily by random mutations in DNA. Second, the article shows that RNA editing is highly tissue-specific, suggesting that it plays an important role in the development and function of different tissues. This challenges the neo darwinist view that evolution is a gradual process driven by the accumulation of small changes in DNA in the whole organism.

RNA editing and protein diversity

RNA editing is a process that can change the nucleotide sequence of messenger RNA (mRNA) molecules after they have been transcribed from DNA. This can lead to changes in the amino acid sequence of the proteins that are translated from the mRNA. In the squid nervous system, Alon et al. found that RNA editing recodes the mRNA of over 57,000 genes. This means that a single DNA sequence can be used to encode a wide variety of different proteins, simply by changing the way that the mRNA is edited.

Neodarwinists argue that evolution is a gradual process, with new traits arising from the accumulation of many small changes in DNA. However, RNA editing shows that new traits can also arise from changes in the way that mRNA is edited, without any changes to the DNA sequence itself.

RNA editing and tissue specificity

Alon et al. also found that RNA editing is highly tissue-specific. This means that different genes are edited in different tissues, resulting in different proteins being expressed in different tissues. This is significant because it suggests that RNA editing plays an important role in the development and function of different tissues.

Neodarwinism is a process that occurs at the level of the population, with new traits arising from changes in the DNA of the population as a whole. However, RNA editing shows that evolution can also occur at the level of the individual, with different tissues evolving different traits depending on the way that their mRNA is edited.

Implications for neo darwinism

The findings of Alon et al. challenge the neo darwinist view of evolution in two ways. First, they show that RNA editing can generate a vast amount of protein diversity from a single DNA sequence challenging the neo darwinist view that evolution is driven primarily by random mutations in DNA. The findings of Alon et al. show that RNA editing is highly tissue-specific. This suggests that RNA editing plays an important role in the development and function of different tissues challenging neo darwinism.

Beyond neo darwinism

The findings of Alon et al. also have implications for other theories of evolution. For example, the authors suggest that RNA editing may have played a role in the evolution of the squid's complex nervous system. This is because RNA editing allows the squid to produce a wide variety of different proteins from a relatively small genome. This flexibility may have been important for the evolution of the squid's complex behaviors.

The findings of Alon et al. also have implications for our understanding of human evolution. For example, the authors suggest that RNA editing may play a role in the development of human diseases, such as cancer and Alzheimer's disease. This is because RNA editing can lead to the production of abnormal proteins.

Overall, the findings of Alon et al. have important implications for our understanding of evolution.

Additional thoughts

The findings of Alon et al. are particularly interesting in light of the recent discovery that RNA editing is also common in humans. In fact, RNA editing is now thought to be more common in humans than DNA mutations. This suggests that RNA editing may play an even more important role in human evolution and disease than previously thought.

Another interesting aspect of RNA editing is that it is a very precise process. This suggests that it is not simply a random process, but rather a process that is controlled by specific enzymes. This raises the question of how RNA editing is regulated and how it has evolved.

Overall, the findings of Alon et al. and other research on RNA editing are challenging our understanding of evolution and disease. It is clear that RNA editing is a complex and important.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond the Sequence: The Epigenetic "Fingers" That Play the DNA Keyboard

Image
Imagine the keyboard itself is not a standard piano keyboard, but a modular synthesizer, capable of producing an almost infinite array of sounds. The DNA sequence, then, represents the fundamental building blocks of this synthesizer, the raw materials from which all sounds are generated. Epigenetics, our "fingers," manipulates these building blocks, adjusting parameters like volume, timbre, and rhythm, transforming the raw potential of the DNA sequence into a symphony of cellular functions. We can further refine the "fingers" analogy. Consider that each finger represents a distinct epigenetic mechanism: DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNA.  DNA methylation, for instance, might be the "index finger," capable of precisely silencing specific genes, like muting individual keys on the synthesizer. Histone modifications, the "middle finger," could represent the ability to adjust the accessibility of the DN...
Read more

Rewriting the Rules: Epigenomic Mutation Bias Challenges Randomness in Evolution

Image
This research challenges the long-held dogma that mutations occur randomly, irrespective of their consequences, by demonstrating a clear, epigenome-mediated mutation bias in Arabidopsis thaliana . The study meticulously unveils how mutation rates are not uniform across the genome but are significantly reduced in functionally constrained regions, particularly within gene bodies and essential genes. This discovery fundamentally alters our understanding of evolutionary processes, suggesting that mutation is not a purely directionless force. "Mutation bias reflects natural selection in Arabidopsis thaliana" This opening statement encapsulates the core finding: mutation rates are not random but reflect epigenetic pressures. The authors demonstrate that mutations are less frequent in crucial genomic regions, directly contradicting the prevailing theory of random mutation. This observation suggests an active mechanism that minimizes deleterious mutations in essentia...
Read more

Why are Christian philosophers running towards Darwin while biologists are "running" away?

Image
As nature reveals the strength of epigenetics and the weakness of Neo-Darwinism, biologists are “running” away from the long-standing accepted theory. In The Federalist , April 2019, Benjamin Dierker reviews “Why one-third of biologists now question Darwinism”: "Current estimates are that approximately one-third of professional academic biologists who do not believe in intelligent design find Darwin’s Theory inadequate to describe all of the complexity in biology.” Dierker continues, “The important note is that these are not ideologues or religious zealots, nor do they propose a god or biblical solution.  Rather, they find problems in the lack of explanatory power of Darwin’s theory in light of modern understanding of mutation, variation, DNA sequencing and more. These expressions of doubt do not reject naturalism or evolution per se, but the rigor of the Neo-Darwinian model for explaining the development of life.” For 40 years, scientists calculated natural se...
Read more