colewd
August 29, 2018, 5:30pm
12
This argument is 23 years old and it sounds like he is soon to update it. Regarding Hunts paper he read Rhodes et al 1995 and Mackenzie et all 1994 confirming @Art ’s claim that a new gene can be created by genetic recombination of existing genetic information. Here is his direct response.
Hi, Bill. Well, I read the Rhoads et al 1995 review describing the system. I will make a few points:
— No Darwinian evolution of the supposedly new gene was shown. It was only discovered in that strain of maize.
— The ability of a random sequence of DNA to form a 4-helix bundle when transcribed beggars belief. It would not be expected to happen in many, many tries. That alone makes it seem very likely that the sequence was not random.
— The authors of the review write: “Although novel when discovered, it is now apparent that many other CMS genes have arisen by recombinational events involving other mitochondrial-encoded genes. In fact, mitochondrial DNA rearrangements are a significant force in changing the genome organization and in causing mutations in the mitochondrial genomes of higher plants (Mackenzie et al., 1994).” A distinct possibility implied by this, it seems to me, is that plant mitochondrial DNA is in fact built to provide easily accessible functional variability. In other words, intelligently provided, pre-existing information was tapped for this protein.
1 Like