Insect homology and diversity attributed to mutations

Genetic code
Share Button

Ancient homology underlies adaptive mimetic diversity across butterflies

Excerpt: “Surprisingly, our results suggest that modulation of this conserved developmental gene has occurred in tandem between these two deeply divergent butterfly lineages, implying an unexpected and remarkable level of predictability in the evolutionary process.”

Reported as: A single evolutionary road may lead to Rome

Excerpt: “Copying errors and genomic viruses directly lead to the wing patterns of these beautiful butterflies,” Gallant said. “It’s these accidents that allow the evolutionary process to move forward. When I look over a field of butterflies, it makes me wonder what types of ‘mistakes’ are happening right now that may lead to important evolutionary changes years from now? What evolutionary processes will we someday be able to predict?”

My comment: Dobzhansky (1964) predicted that bird-watchers and butterfly-collectors would never become serious scientists, and his predictions are still coming true in reports like this one.

Two more generations of researchers have since been taught to believe in a ridiculous theory about mutations, natural selection. and the evolution of biodiversity, which is clearly nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled by RNA-mediated events in species from microbes to man. Instead, this group finds that the nutrient-dependent ecological adaptations manifested in the wing morphology of butterflies is caused by mutations that somehow predictably lead to evolution.

Would that be by natural selection — instead of by the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction? It could be if perturbed protein-folding linked nutrient uptake to increasing organismal complexity. But in all other species from microbes to man the epigenetic landscape is linked to the biophysically-constrained physical landscape of DNA in organized genomes via the pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction.

Take Darwin’s pigeons, for example, because 1) the EphB2 gene is a strong candidate for the derived head crest phenotype  2) that trait evolved just once and 3) it spread throughout the species. 4) The crest also originates early in development by 5) localized molecular mechanisms and the reversal of feather bud polarity.” See: Genomic Diversity and Evolution of the Head Crest in the Rock Pigeon

Link the EphB2 gene and nutrient-dependent amino acid substitutions and chromosomal rearrangements in white-throated sparrows to their pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction and you have the established link to morphology and behavior of the butterflies, birds, bees, and all other species on this planet via conserved molecular mechanisms.

Try to link mutations and natural selection for anything but food to biodiversity and you must invent theories about how random changes lead to predictable outcomes via changes in one gene in vertebrates and invertebrates.

Go ahead, make my day! Watch the butterflies and make predictions about evolutionary processes. Keep touting your ridiculous theories as serious scientists recognize why Dobzhansky (1973) mentioned that  “…the so-called alpha chains of hemoglobin have identical sequences of amino acids in man and the chimpanzee, but they differ in a single amino acid (out of 141) in the gorilla.”

He seems to have predicted serious scientists would learn about nutrient-dependent amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types in all individuals of all species, but that evolutionary theorists would not. Did he believe the theorists would never be more than butterfly collectors and bird-watchers who didn’t learn anything about molecular biology? Did he believe that theorists could never grasp the facts about how ecological variation leads to ecological adaptations via conserved molecular mechanisms in species from microbes to man?


Share Button