Hi Adrie, Some remarks at the end. On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 1:11 AM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <[email protected]> wrote:
> Incestual crossbreed brings out the best unknown traits in the offspring. > But!!, it will also bring out the worst case scenario's.The number of bad > mutations will spice up real far.The Jack Wattley discus fish is a good > example of incestual breeding and crossing back. > Perfect results for in a fish tank, no changes of survival in the nature. > Nature will filter them back out if tried. > > Or try the Pigeon blood discus as example, or the Malboro's or the > leopards,or the 'degen-discus', changeless in nature,...(visability for > predators.) > > Same goes for Koi really, most are very beautiful, but taken back to nature, > the visability for predators is simply to high.And they lost the ability to > protect themselves to cancer mostly. > > Think of the Orchid hybrids(F1 Hybrids), Maize,(F1 Hybrids)...chanceless > outside a controlled monoculture. > The breeders are clever,However, they kill immediatly all results that are > unwished,and mostly will deny it. > > > But i do have to say, the field Ian is coining,Epigenetics, is a very > interesting and promising field.But a change and a modification,will almost > never become a mutation. > Checked it out in the Kew gardens dbase.solid. good field. > > Adrie > [Mark] Evolution, as it is used in biology, is based on the development of species within an observed niche. The species adapts to fill that niche in the most effective way. A koi pond is such a niche. In such a case, man is part of the evolutionary pressure, no different from the amount of rain in a rain forest. Some like to treat man as separate from nature, but I think this is a false paradigm. Man is nature, and as such contributes to evolution within a niche. If a giraffe wanders into the desert, it will not survive, neither will an orchid. Epigenetics involves, in part, the covalent modification of DNA through reactions such as methylation. Such methylation patterns acquired, do the the environment, can be conferred to offspring according to current theory. Of course the interaction of the environment on the species as a deterministic heritable trait is still a growing field. This is contrary to the genetic theories of, say, 30 years ago, where the genetic sequence was everything. The Nature v Nurture paradigm is constantly shifting in balance. One useful way of looking at it is that the genetic code itself has no inherent existence. That is, it is a dynamic interplay of the outside with the inside, and no clear demarkation can be made. The notions of entanglement and codependent arising are useful here, and will eventually enter into the field of biology. Drawing strict lines of distinction is always difficult and misleading. Science progresses by starts and plateaus, and sometimes back-tracking. New theories take a while to escape the entrenched dogma. This is no different from MoQ. Cheers, Mark > > -- > parser > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
