1. Chapter 3, pages 28, the box discusses how a behaviors structure and function are influenced by many genes. So my question is that if there is a minor mutation is one gene, could the behavior still function almost normally? Or would the slight mutation cause the behavior to be different? 2. Chapter 3, page 35, In regards to the inducing mutations section. I concerned about the ethics of inducing a mutation in a gene sequence to find a change in behavior. Does it make it okay if it is not overall harming the animal? 3. Chapter 4, page 64, I'm still a little confused about gene flow, and I always have been. I'm just confused on if it is a good thing or a bad thing. Natural selections takes away the animals who cannot adapt, but gene flow prevents/ slows the adaption process, so wouldn't more populations be dying? I'm just confused.
Rachel, regarding gene flow, it is generally thought of as a positive because it increases variation in the gene pool of the population. You're totally right that, in an unchanging or extreme environment, there will be strong selection on those individuals that have genes for traits that allow them to be the best fit for the current environmental conditions. However, because environments are really pretty variable, the traits that are useful at one time might not be the best in the future; gene flow is kind of a way of hedging bets for the future. Hope that helps clear up the confusion a bit:)
1. Chapter 3, Page 29: The process of how DNA works and unzips to form mRNA was explained pretty well. I am still a little confused on how some of the regions of mRNA get snipped out if they do not code for a protein. i am just not sure if i understand how that works. If those regions don't get snipped out, is this how mutations form? 2. Chapter 3, Page 38-39. Fruit flies and honeybees don't forage for the same reason, but both of their for genes regulate aging. I wonder what other similarities and differences genes and behaviors can have in different species. 3. Chapter 4, Page 60, Selection has two meanings when discussing natural selection and artificial selection. I am still little confused on why these terms are different. i know what is from nature and one is human chose but I feel like selection is still similar for both cases.
Wait till you see what I have in store for you now to try and clear up the process of DNA-RNA-protein! I'll also try to clear up AS vs. NS., but you're right, it's mostly due to what is exerting the selection pressure; if humans are the pressure, it's artificial selection. If the environment is the pressure, it's natural selection. I also love your second question and we'll talk more about this in class tomorrow.
1. Chapter 3, Page 31. Why does the fru transcript express differently in males vs females? How does this work exactly? What does it mean by the mutant fru males being bi? Why not the females? 2. Chapter 3, Page 34. In the section on Artificial selection in mentions how we as humans do this to make the breeds better through selective breeding. I know that breeds that are pure bred have a lot of issues but this section only mentioned the benefits. Is it not the case that selective breeding is okay to do with dogs because I was told that it can cause a lot of bad things to happen to the dogs? 3. Chapter 4, Page 66. I am very confused by the definition of negative-associative mating, even after looking it up. What exactly is it?
1. Chapter 3, page 30: When discussing the expression of genes, it is stated that all of the cells of an animal's body have the same genes, some of them are just turned off during development. My question is why are certain genes turned off in an individual? Are there certain factors that cause those genes to turn off? Is it simply random? 2. Chapter 3, page 35: It is said that it is possible to induce certain mutations in order to study changes in behavior. If we have the ability to induce mutations, I was curious if we would also be able to shut off mutations as well? For example, with the fruit fly dunce mutation, individuals are unable to correctly create memory formations; Is there any way that mutation could be "fixed"? 3. Chapter 4, page 63: If gene flow has the possibility of slowing or even halting the fact of local adaptation, would gene flow be considered a bad thing? I thought that genetic variation was the goal, but gene flow just seems to lessen the amount of variation between populations.
Love these questions, Aspen! For your question regarding gene flow, I tried to tackle this a bit in response to Rachel's question above. Regarding your question, you're right, variation is a good thing and gene flow in some ways can increase variation in the gene pool. In extreme cases, when you have lots of individuals migrating out of the area and few migrating in for example, then gene flow would be more of a negative.
In terms of why are some genes off and what controls this, all cells have the same genome because you have one set genome that you get at the moment reproductive magic happens. There isn't a way, at least not a way that exists yet, for cells to divide and not have the same genetic material. Then you have genes that's whole job is to turn off other genes. I'd love to talk about your second question in class so we can get everyone's thoughts are on this.
1. Chapter 3, page 35: when it says that when organisms are exposed to mutagenic agents, some of them become behaviorally aberrant and can be separated from the population of normal individuals on this basis, i was wondering if the exposure to the specific agents would have similar side effects on multiple individuals making them different from others but similar to the ones who were affected? 2. chapter 4, page 63: When it is describing gene flow and states that gene flow makes populations more similar to one another, and that depending on its strength it can even slow down or halt the local adaptions in the different groups, does this mean that there will be no differences in the different populations and they would all have similar gene expressions no matter their specific environment just because they travel from one population to another? 3. Chapter 3, Page 51: It states that sneaker males are 10 times smaller then migratory males but don't travel out of freshwater to reach full maturity, does this give them a higher reproductive success because there are less "fully matured and grown males"to compete with around the females in the fresh water ?
Nice questions. Make sure to ask your first one when we talk about epigenetics in class. As for gene flow, it depends on how much back and forth there is between populations; so if they're moving back and forth between two populations easily, those two populations are basically going to become homogeneous. I guess in terms of the environment, it would depend on how similar the environment is. You can think of environmental pressures and gene flow as two factors that contribute to what the gene pool of the population looks like. If the environment is really similar and you have lots of gene flow too, you'd expect really little variation between the populations pretty quickly.
1.) Chapter 3, page 31: It says that "The heritability of a complex trait such as behavior is rarely more than 50% (Plomin et al. 2003)." In which cases, or rather, in what behaviors is the heritability of a complex trait more than 50%? Is this seen more in some species rather than in others?
2.) Chapter 3, page 35: It talks about how mutagens can alter DNA, which can subsequently alter some behaviors. This might be going into a philosophical discussion, but I'm a tad confused. So a mutagen can be introduced to an individual, that then alters their genetics, which then can affect their offspring, and the book said that this was an example of how genes can affect behavior. However, if the mutagen is responsible for this change and it is introduced in the environment, wouldn't then this be an example of how environment affects behavior? Because mutagens are in an environment, then it affects genes, then it affects behavior. Am I perhaps just thinking too much into it? I understand that DNA can mutate on its own and make mistakes resulting in behavioral changes, and that makes sense, but mutagens in environments changing genes that change behavior doesnt seem like it should be labeled as a behavioral change due to genetics (at least not 100%)
3.) Chapter 4, page 68: Here it talks about Evolutionarily Stable Strategies. I think I have a base understanding of the definition from the gull example, but was wondering if we could talk a little bit more about this in class so I can get amore firm grasp on it. (It seems like an important and pretty interesting concept.)
I'll try to better explain epigenetics in class tomorrow and Monday. ESSs are a gray area because genes are what lead to them but they really fall under the category of Big T's ultimate questions. We'll talk about them a lot more in a few weeks but I'll touch on them some on Monday.
Chapter 3, page 52: I'm a little confused as to how exactly epigenetics actually works. I understand that it involves altering gene expression without altering changes in the DNA sequences, however I don't understand when exactly DNA methylation and acetylation know when to "act" on the expression Chapter 4 page 63: when the author is talking about stabilizing and directional selection, they mention the insects and resisting the pesticide and how that is an example of directional selection. Does that mean that directional selection will only be caused by an external factor like humans creating pesticides, or an external virus or disease, or can it be caused within or by the species? hapter 4 page 68: When talking about negative-assortative mating, is there a point in mating when a species knows when to stop looking for different phenotypes and when to start looking for similar ones, or do some species only use negative assortative mating strategies?
Great questions. Directional selection can be caused by anything that is a selection pressure. We'll look at a cool example of conspecifics as a cause of directional selection when we talk about mate choice.
Ch3. Page 31: The text goes in to tel the importance of trait testing by using similar environments for the subjects to live in, but to fully understand the trait, is environmental change and application not needed for this study? I feel that the environment would influence how certain traits may or may not develop. Ch3. Pg 36: the text discusses fruit flies and several traits that they may or may not inherit. One of them being a destructive trait "rutubaga" that causes poor learning and por memory. I do not see how even in a small species like fruit flies, that such a seemingly harmful trait is still possible to pass along. Aren't all traits meant to be supportive in some manner. Ch4. P58: The author defines evolution as changed alleles over time in a population, but I feel that evolution could be more than just alleles adapting and changing themselves to better adapt to the enviroment. Could it also be learning and gaining knowledge beyond the genetic structure of the organism? Or is evolution specifically gentics based?
You're totally right the environment would have an influence; that's what epigenetics is all about. If we want to know what's due to genes and what's due to environment, we need to be able to tease the two apart which is why they try to test the trait in similar environments first.
Evolution is all about genes, it's gotta be genetically based. And alleles can't adapt to the environment, the environment selects on the raw material of the population, so what's already there.
1. Chapter 3, pages 32 & 33: The book describes comparing inbred strains. Inbreeding is usually very unhealthy for populations of animals. Can they compensate for deleterious mutations that might develop? I would think that some of the consequences of inbreeding could affect the study in terms of potential confounds. Chapter 3, page 39: If the activity of the for gene didn't increase, would a honeybee then remain in a janitorial position, given the hive is functioning well? Some bees only a day old transitioned to foragers due to demand, presumably. Could the activity of that gene alternatively become lazy (for lack of a better word) over time? Chapter 4, page 76: I found the mention of the model that, with simple rules, represented territoriality quite well very interesting. I read that another model, which I believe was primarily based on distance between members, was able to show, fairly accurately, wolf pack hunts. Like the book says, it does not prove anything necessarily, but models seem to remind us to not over-complicate seemingly complex behavioral topics.
1. Chapter 3, page 30: Gene expression has always fascinated me, partially because I have never fully understood it. The book explains that some genes are turned off during development. Do all the same genes get turned off in each cell? Does it take only one cell to have a recessive gene which can lead to some disease? 2. Chapter 4, page 60: I don't understand why they are differentiating the meaning of selection in artificial and natural selection. I understand the difference between the two, but they are both selection and I don't think that changes the meaning of selection. 3. Chapter 4, page 68: is negative-assortative mating essentially opposites attract for phenotypes? if so, is this why sometimes opposites attract? Or is it simply breeding outside of the current gene pool, not entirely opposite phenotype selection?
1. Chapter 3, pages 28, the box discusses how a behaviors structure and function are influenced by many genes. So my question is that if there is a minor mutation is one gene, could the behavior still function almost normally? Or would the slight mutation cause the behavior to be different?
ReplyDelete2. Chapter 3, page 35, In regards to the inducing mutations section. I concerned about the ethics of inducing a mutation in a gene sequence to find a change in behavior. Does it make it okay if it is not overall harming the animal?
3. Chapter 4, page 64, I'm still a little confused about gene flow, and I always have been. I'm just confused on if it is a good thing or a bad thing. Natural selections takes away the animals who cannot adapt, but gene flow prevents/ slows the adaption process, so wouldn't more populations be dying? I'm just confused.
Rachel, regarding gene flow, it is generally thought of as a positive because it increases variation in the gene pool of the population. You're totally right that, in an unchanging or extreme environment, there will be strong selection on those individuals that have genes for traits that allow them to be the best fit for the current environmental conditions. However, because environments are really pretty variable, the traits that are useful at one time might not be the best in the future; gene flow is kind of a way of hedging bets for the future. Hope that helps clear up the confusion a bit:)
Delete1. Chapter 3, Page 29: The process of how DNA works and unzips to form mRNA was explained pretty well. I am still a little confused on how some of the regions of mRNA get snipped out if they do not code for a protein. i am just not sure if i understand how that works. If those regions don't get snipped out, is this how mutations form?
ReplyDelete2. Chapter 3, Page 38-39. Fruit flies and honeybees don't forage for the same reason, but both of their for genes regulate aging. I wonder what other similarities and differences genes and behaviors can have in different species.
3. Chapter 4, Page 60, Selection has two meanings when discussing natural selection and artificial selection. I am still little confused on why these terms are different. i know what is from nature and one is human chose but I feel like selection is still similar for both cases.
Emily,
DeleteWait till you see what I have in store for you now to try and clear up the process of DNA-RNA-protein! I'll also try to clear up AS vs. NS., but you're right, it's mostly due to what is exerting the selection pressure; if humans are the pressure, it's artificial selection. If the environment is the pressure, it's natural selection. I also love your second question and we'll talk more about this in class tomorrow.
1. Chapter 3, Page 31. Why does the fru transcript express differently in males vs females? How does this work exactly? What does it mean by the mutant fru males being bi? Why not the females?
ReplyDelete2. Chapter 3, Page 34. In the section on Artificial selection in mentions how we as humans do this to make the breeds better through selective breeding. I know that breeds that are pure bred have a lot of issues but this section only mentioned the benefits. Is it not the case that selective breeding is okay to do with dogs because I was told that it can cause a lot of bad things to happen to the dogs?
3. Chapter 4, Page 66. I am very confused by the definition of negative-associative mating, even after looking it up. What exactly is it?
1. Chapter 3, page 30: When discussing the expression of genes, it is stated that all of the cells of an animal's body have the same genes, some of them are just turned off during development. My question is why are certain genes turned off in an individual? Are there certain factors that cause those genes to turn off? Is it simply random?
ReplyDelete2. Chapter 3, page 35: It is said that it is possible to induce certain mutations in order to study changes in behavior. If we have the ability to induce mutations, I was curious if we would also be able to shut off mutations as well? For example, with the fruit fly dunce mutation, individuals are unable to correctly create memory formations; Is there any way that mutation could be "fixed"?
3. Chapter 4, page 63: If gene flow has the possibility of slowing or even halting the fact of local adaptation, would gene flow be considered a bad thing? I thought that genetic variation was the goal, but gene flow just seems to lessen the amount of variation between populations.
Love these questions, Aspen! For your question regarding gene flow, I tried to tackle this a bit in response to Rachel's question above. Regarding your question, you're right, variation is a good thing and gene flow in some ways can increase variation in the gene pool. In extreme cases, when you have lots of individuals migrating out of the area and few migrating in for example, then gene flow would be more of a negative.
DeleteIn terms of why are some genes off and what controls this, all cells have the same genome because you have one set genome that you get at the moment reproductive magic happens. There isn't a way, at least not a way that exists yet, for cells to divide and not have the same genetic material. Then you have genes that's whole job is to turn off other genes. I'd love to talk about your second question in class so we can get everyone's thoughts are on this.
1. Chapter 3, page 35: when it says that when organisms are exposed to mutagenic agents, some of them become behaviorally aberrant and can be separated from the population of normal individuals on this basis, i was wondering if the exposure to the specific agents would have similar side effects on multiple individuals making them different from others but similar to the ones who were affected?
ReplyDelete2. chapter 4, page 63: When it is describing gene flow and states that gene flow makes populations more similar to one another, and that depending on its strength it can even slow down or halt the local adaptions in the different groups, does this mean that there will be no differences in the different populations and they would all have similar gene expressions no matter their specific environment just because they travel from one population to another?
3. Chapter 3, Page 51: It states that sneaker males are 10 times smaller then migratory males but don't travel out of freshwater to reach full maturity, does this give them a higher reproductive success because there are less "fully matured and grown males"to compete with around the females in the fresh water ?
Nice questions. Make sure to ask your first one when we talk about epigenetics in class. As for gene flow, it depends on how much back and forth there is between populations; so if they're moving back and forth between two populations easily, those two populations are basically going to become homogeneous. I guess in terms of the environment, it would depend on how similar the environment is. You can think of environmental pressures and gene flow as two factors that contribute to what the gene pool of the population looks like. If the environment is really similar and you have lots of gene flow too, you'd expect really little variation between the populations pretty quickly.
Delete1.) Chapter 3, page 31: It says that "The
ReplyDeleteheritability of a complex trait such as behavior is rarely
more than 50% (Plomin et al. 2003)." In which cases, or rather, in what behaviors is the heritability of a complex trait more than 50%? Is this seen more in some species rather than in others?
2.) Chapter 3, page 35: It talks about how mutagens can alter DNA, which can subsequently alter some behaviors. This might be going into a philosophical discussion, but I'm a tad confused. So a mutagen can be introduced to an individual, that then alters their genetics, which then can affect their offspring, and the book said that this was an example of how genes can affect behavior. However, if the mutagen is responsible for this change and it is introduced in the environment, wouldn't then this be an example of how environment affects behavior? Because mutagens are in an environment, then it affects genes, then it affects behavior. Am I perhaps just thinking too much into it? I understand that DNA can mutate on its own and make mistakes resulting in behavioral changes, and that makes sense, but mutagens in environments changing genes that change behavior doesnt seem like it should be labeled as a behavioral change due to genetics (at least not 100%)
3.) Chapter 4, page 68: Here it talks about Evolutionarily Stable Strategies. I think I have a base understanding of the definition from the gull example, but was wondering if we could talk a little bit more about this in class so I can get amore firm grasp on it. (It seems like an important and pretty interesting concept.)
I'll try to better explain epigenetics in class tomorrow and Monday. ESSs are a gray area because genes are what lead to them but they really fall under the category of Big T's ultimate questions. We'll talk about them a lot more in a few weeks but I'll touch on them some on Monday.
DeleteChapter 3, page 52: I'm a little confused as to how exactly epigenetics actually works. I understand that it involves altering gene expression without altering changes in the DNA sequences, however I don't understand when exactly DNA methylation and acetylation know when to "act" on the expression
ReplyDeleteChapter 4 page 63: when the author is talking about stabilizing and directional selection, they mention the insects and resisting the pesticide and how that is an example of directional selection. Does that mean that directional selection will only be caused by an external factor like humans creating pesticides, or an external virus or disease, or can it be caused within or by the species?
hapter 4 page 68: When talking about negative-assortative mating, is there a point in mating when a species knows when to stop looking for different phenotypes and when to start looking for similar ones, or do some species only use negative assortative mating strategies?
Great questions. Directional selection can be caused by anything that is a selection pressure. We'll look at a cool example of conspecifics as a cause of directional selection when we talk about mate choice.
DeleteCh3. Page 31: The text goes in to tel the importance of trait testing by using similar environments for the subjects to live in, but to fully understand the trait, is environmental change and application not needed for this study? I feel that the environment would influence how certain traits may or may not develop.
ReplyDeleteCh3. Pg 36: the text discusses fruit flies and several traits that they may or may not inherit. One of them being a destructive trait "rutubaga" that causes poor learning and por memory. I do not see how even in a small species like fruit flies, that such a seemingly harmful trait is still possible to pass along. Aren't all traits meant to be supportive in some manner.
Ch4. P58: The author defines evolution as changed alleles over time in a population, but I feel that evolution could be more than just alleles adapting and changing themselves to better adapt to the enviroment. Could it also be learning and gaining knowledge beyond the genetic structure of the organism? Or is evolution specifically gentics based?
You're totally right the environment would have an influence; that's what epigenetics is all about. If we want to know what's due to genes and what's due to environment, we need to be able to tease the two apart which is why they try to test the trait in similar environments first.
DeleteEvolution is all about genes, it's gotta be genetically based. And alleles can't adapt to the environment, the environment selects on the raw material of the population, so what's already there.
1. Chapter 3, pages 32 & 33: The book describes comparing inbred strains. Inbreeding is usually very unhealthy for populations of animals. Can they compensate for deleterious mutations that might develop? I would think that some of the consequences of inbreeding could affect the study in terms of potential confounds.
ReplyDeleteChapter 3, page 39: If the activity of the for gene didn't increase, would a honeybee then remain in a janitorial position, given the hive is functioning well? Some bees only a day old transitioned to foragers due to demand, presumably. Could the activity of that gene alternatively become lazy (for lack of a better word) over time?
Chapter 4, page 76: I found the mention of the model that, with simple rules, represented territoriality quite well very interesting. I read that another model, which I believe was primarily based on distance between members, was able to show, fairly accurately, wolf pack hunts. Like the book says, it does not prove anything necessarily, but models seem to remind us to not over-complicate seemingly complex behavioral topics.
1. Chapter 3, page 30: Gene expression has always fascinated me, partially because I have never fully understood it. The book explains that some genes are turned off during development. Do all the same genes get turned off in each cell? Does it take only one cell to have a recessive gene which can lead to some disease?
ReplyDelete2. Chapter 4, page 60: I don't understand why they are differentiating the meaning of selection in artificial and natural selection. I understand the difference between the two, but they are both selection and I don't think that changes the meaning of selection.
3. Chapter 4, page 68: is negative-assortative mating essentially opposites attract for phenotypes? if so, is this why sometimes opposites attract? Or is it simply breeding outside of the current gene pool, not entirely opposite phenotype selection?