On 09/07/10 22:10, Jacob Keller wrote:
In terms of "usefulness," I was actually thinking about cells learning how
to make new proteins from other cells,
Which they do already by exchanging genes
  or perhaps an immune system could use
the info to make the right choice of starting materials.
The methods by which the immune system works have been at least partially elucidated, and are available for study.
  Also, codon bias
could be explained as resulting from the nature of the reverse translatase
machinery.
1) Or, you could explain it as resulting from the nature of unicorns. You might understand that this would be an easier sell if you could first establish the existence of unicorns. 2) What is it about codon bias which you feel requires such an elaborate explanation?

  Or an invader could copy the host's membrane proteins to evade
detection.
They can do that now by
1) Stealing the host's genes
2) Stealing existing peptides and lipids and grafting them to their surface
Ah, so many possibilities! And as I said before, considering that
it would be so useful, and that the genius of macromolecular design observed
in nature is apparently so unlimited, shouldn't it be out there somewhere?
"Design"? I think there are more appropriate descriptions for life as it has been observed. The complexity of life can be explained fairly well by Darwinian evolution, i.e. replication with variation coupled with selection. This works through modification of existing entities. The relatedness of many molecules and the theme of modification of pre-existing parts ought to be apparent to someone who has learned about replication and sources of genetic novelty, and spent any time studying protein structure.

The large barriers to the introduction of your reverse translation system have already been pointed out. Come up with a Darwinian sequence of how it could have developed gradually from existing systems and get back to us. For comparisons, Darwinian explanations for the development of ribosomal translation and the genetic code have been proferred. "I want it, therefore it should exist" doesn't cut it.
Nobel prize to the one who finds it...

Certainly.
NB It should not cross our minds, I don't think, that if it were there, it
would have been found. Small RNA phenomena, for example, went undetected for
years, despite their commonness and high importance.

Now that we have access to many complete genomes, if genes were being swapped by your reverse translatase system rather than horizontal gene transfer, the results should be readily apparent.

Cheers,

--
=======================================================================
All Things Serve the Beam
=======================================================================
                               David J. Schuller
                               modern man in a post-modern world
                               MacCHESS, Cornell University
                               schul...@cornell.edu

Reply via email to