Animal And Human Genome Research

Genomes for those who may not know are basically a full set of chromosomes; all the inheritable traits of an organism. Scientists have been collecting these genomes from animals (and humans) for quite some time now. Recently, there has been attempt with the animal genomes to show the evolutionary tree. But what they found was a disappointment.

The evidence was extremely weak, said Michael J. Sanderson of the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at University of Arizona” Science. A tiny fraction of the Genomes showed very minimal support for the evolutionary tree. Using a color coded chart, and computer models, with a broad array of Genomes, Sanderson was certain the tree would become visible. Instead, the tree remains pretty much invisible.

Using the lowest requirements in the experiment to make a case for the evolutionary tree, only 12 percent had a weak signal, while 88 percent did not have any signal at all. “An accurate high-resolution phylogeny will require substantial increases in sequence data to bring that score to a level comparable to that of the best-supported higher taxa.” concluded evolutionary scientist Sanderson.

There are some who feel creation science doesn’t produce knowledge, which is not true. Then there are those who feel that evolutionary science produces more questions than answers. I found the research to be quite revealing, it is like testing for blood, you take a sample if the water turns a certain color, there is blood, if not, there is no blood. This particular genome research didn’t turn the proper color, no evolutionary tree. Here are the rest of the scores from the genome research…

“Among individual OTUs [operational taxonomic units], Homo sapiens had the maximum support value of 293.9, but the distribution of scores had a long tail leading to 6402 OTUs with no support at all (most of which, 6079, simply were not found in any phylogenetically informative clusters).

The top 10 were all mammals; the top 25 were mammals, angiosperms (tomato, potato, tobacco, rice, and wheat), Drosophila melanogaster, and Drosophila simulans, all with support scores above 60 units. Of the 171,703 OTUs for which scores were calculated, only 12% achieved minimal phylogenetic support. The mean support was 0.84, less than the equivalent of each taxon being found in at least one well-resolved and -supported phylogenetic tree.”

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s