Hi John -- that Russian experiment with Foxes was fascinating, and no doubt breeding works. However the experiment you site does not correlate the behavioral changes in the two populations of foxes - one bred for aggression and the other bred for docility -- with any corresponding changes to the foxes DNA and specifically to DNA regions linked in controlling the trait of aggression. Not that I doubt that there must be some kind of hereditary link to these different behavioral traits -- whether it is epigenetic or there is an actual underlying difference in the populations DNA is what is still unclear to me and what I would like to know. Rephrasing my question to state it more clearly: I wonder to what extent breeding of behavioral traits especially act using epigenetic mechanisms (methylation etc.) to control expression in the phenotype versus actually mutating the target populations DNA. Is the docile Fox an example of an epigenetic breeding outcome or are these foxes DNA different from the aggressive populations DNA. More in general I am curious about the degree to which evolution makes use of these epigenetic techniques to more rapidly "evolve" behaviors and other traits that increase the fitness of the individual. I don't question that breeding can induce hereditary changes in a population, but rather am wondering about what mechanisms are used to do so. Epigenetic mechanisms seem well suited for this particular role and if indeed the differences in aggression can be traced back to methylation (or to the other existing epigenetic) mechanisms. If indeed, at least some types of bred characteristics or traits in animal populations result from epigenetic means then the selection or breeding selection of the fittest animals (according to the selection criteria) in the population could be said to be a case of epigenetic evolution. It would have satisfied all of the conditions required for evolution. Now I don't know that say in the cases of the experiment with Foxes that involves epigenetic changes, maybe in conjunction with some genetic predisposition -- as seems to be the case with some of the identified genes implicated in aggression for example. But if it can be demonstrated that there is an epigenetic component of this "evolved" (that is bred) outcome then epigenetic evolution will be demonstrated to have occurred. We now pretty much do know that epigenetic changes in an individual can have hereditary effects in the individuals offspring and in their offspring as well. I strongly suspect there are some good examples out there of epigenetic evolution -- cases where it can be demonstrated that these epigenetic hereditary changes were selected for and spread (i.e. increased their relative prevalence within an effected population). Cheers, -Chris D
________________________________ From: John Clark <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 9:23 AM Subject: Re: Serious proof of why the theory of evolution is wrong On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Chris de Morsella <[email protected]> wrote: >I was wondering if there is any evidence baked into the DNA so to speak; in >other words are there any areas of coding DNA that are known to be (or perhaps >suspected of being) linked to and involved with such behavioral traits as >herding instinct etc. In 1959 a breeding program was started with foxes, one group was bred for aggregation the other group for tameness. Today the aggressive foxes are so dangerous a human dare not even approach them, but the tame foxes not only behave like dogs remarkably they've even started to look like dogs, and people looking at photos of the 2 groups almost universally regard the tame group as looking cuter than the aggressive breed. http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/350422/description/Tamed_fox_shows_domestications_effects_on_the_brain John K Clark that have been shown to have evolved in dogs (or more accurately been bred into dogs by human directed breeding for desired traits). >I would not be surprised at all to find that there were, and feel pretty >certain that a delta mapping of wolf DNA and say a Sheep Collies DNA will show >changes in the key sets of genes that would be implicated in these >behaviors... that is if we know what they are. > >Mapping behaviors to genes gets tricky because things as complex as a >behavior, such as the instinct to herd sheep, probably draws upon multiple DNA >coding sequences located in possibly different genes even. I don't think >geneticists really have nailed down how instincts are wired into our genetic >heredity -- we have statistical correlations and such, but - perhaps it is my >own ignorance, but no clear story as to how these genetically encoded behavior >genes actually work -- end to end. > >While, for example some Newspaper headline may boldly state that scientists >have found the "gene" for aggression say, a deeper read will reveal that what >was found was some DNA that may influence whether or not an individual becomes >aggressive, for example, but that whether they actually do or not also depends >on a lot of other co-factors, making it hard to determine what the trigger >chain of events and changes actually is in reality. Very often, it turns out >there is an environmental component in how behavioral traits arise in an >individual as well. > >The interplay between hereditary information and the many dynamic processes at >work in the organism at each phase: from the transcription phase that >ultimately results in mRNA strands becoming used as a template in the ribosome >to produce amino acid chains is still too poorly understood -- IMO -- for >assertive statements. > >We hypothesize the genetic component in many behaviors; have found regions of >DNA that are implicated in controlling behavior, but the science is still >underdeveloped, the genetic maps we have at our disposal far too course and >incomplete and our understanding of the many dynamic processes at work still >incomplete. > >But -- [laughing] -- maybe I just need to catch up... it is such a rapidly >moving field. > >-Chris > > From: meekerdb <[email protected]> >To: [email protected] >Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 11:56 AM > >Subject: Re: Serious proof of why the theory of evolution is wrong > > > >On 8/12/2013 9:41 AM, Chris de Morsella wrote: > >What co-evolutionary traits have been shown to have occurred in dogs and >cattle because of their association with humans (so which are therefore part >of the equation)? >Dogs are just wolves that, thru (un)natural selection have evolved to bond with humans as with a pack. Cattle similarly evolved to be docile and tolerant of humans. > > > >>For example with sheep – is sheep dog behavior evolved? Or are they >>expressing genetic potential that was already innate in their species? That >>would also be an interesting example, if it can be shown that an evolved set >>of behaviors (e.g. instincts) developed in those dog species that were bred >>for working with cattle or sheep that is absent in other dog species that >>there are epigenetic and/or DNA encoding differences that are related to and >>underpin the behaviors and traits being observed. >Wolves herd sheep too, so there was innate potential. But dogs can also learn a lot of words. I don't know whether wolves can or not. That might be an evolved capability. > >Brent > -- >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >"Everything List" group. >To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >email to mailto:everything-list%[email protected]. >To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > >-- >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >"Everything List" group. >To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >email to mailto:everything-list%[email protected]. >To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
