Family may provide evolution clue
- Thread starter 2-0-Sixx
- Start date
Alright, getting back onto the topic at hand...
I saw an article a few days ago in the local papers about these Turkish folk walking around on all fours. I think theres a good chance that this disorder may have some evolutionary basis. There are two options:
(a) it is simply a brain disorder, which prevents them from walking properly. However, I don't see how cerebral ataxia, which affects co-ordination and balance, would result in quadrapedal movement - I'd prefer to think that they'd simply fall over more often (sounds stupid, but I'm being serious). The flexion in their knees and necks could be a direct result of walking on all fours for their whole lives
(b) there truly is a gene responsible for bipedalism, and it has been knocked out in the Turkish siblings. The german scientists, who have identified 'the' gene on chromosome 17 (I say 'the' because there is probably more than one gene responsible for the abnormality), need to provide more information on it - then we can determine whether it truly does affect the ability to walk as a biped. i.e. is it differentially expressed in various tissues and at different stages of growth, how is it regulated, does it produce a functional protein and if so, what is its structure, where is it located in the cell etc. Before these questions are answered, the cause of this mutation is subjective.
I don't care for Prof. Humphreys argument though. He rejects the idea that the disease is genetic and yet claims that this could be the way humankinds direct ancestors walked, suggesting that this could be an 'important step between coming down from the trees and becoming fully bipedal'. In which case, it is genetic and should be classified as a form of backward evolution.
I saw an article a few days ago in the local papers about these Turkish folk walking around on all fours. I think theres a good chance that this disorder may have some evolutionary basis. There are two options:
(a) it is simply a brain disorder, which prevents them from walking properly. However, I don't see how cerebral ataxia, which affects co-ordination and balance, would result in quadrapedal movement - I'd prefer to think that they'd simply fall over more often (sounds stupid, but I'm being serious). The flexion in their knees and necks could be a direct result of walking on all fours for their whole lives
(b) there truly is a gene responsible for bipedalism, and it has been knocked out in the Turkish siblings. The german scientists, who have identified 'the' gene on chromosome 17 (I say 'the' because there is probably more than one gene responsible for the abnormality), need to provide more information on it - then we can determine whether it truly does affect the ability to walk as a biped. i.e. is it differentially expressed in various tissues and at different stages of growth, how is it regulated, does it produce a functional protein and if so, what is its structure, where is it located in the cell etc. Before these questions are answered, the cause of this mutation is subjective.
I don't care for Prof. Humphreys argument though. He rejects the idea that the disease is genetic and yet claims that this could be the way humankinds direct ancestors walked, suggesting that this could be an 'important step between coming down from the trees and becoming fully bipedal'. In which case, it is genetic and should be classified as a form of backward evolution.
i also believe that its a brain disorder, for them to revert to quadripeds wouldnt there be more like them?
evoluotion the way i understood it from my very cool anthro class is that its a proccess of decades for minor changes...how is it that we havent heard of a whole family tree of these ppl, there is no reason for them to be walking on all fours, our genetic makeups, skeleton structures are what they are through decades of changes...maybe they should look into their bones and skeleton structure, i too could walk on all fours, doesnt mean evolution left me in the dust.
evoluotion the way i understood it from my very cool anthro class is that its a proccess of decades for minor changes...how is it that we havent heard of a whole family tree of these ppl, there is no reason for them to be walking on all fours, our genetic makeups, skeleton structures are what they are through decades of changes...maybe they should look into their bones and skeleton structure, i too could walk on all fours, doesnt mean evolution left me in the dust.
SUR CALI MAN,
YOU'VE BEEN IN THE CLINK CLICCIN' UP WITH TOO MANY ARYAN BROTHERHOOD WHITEBOYS. WHAT IF KORPS 559 OR N-E NORTHERN CALI FOLK SOAK UP SOME gAME FROM BLAK FOLK? WHAT'S WRONg WITH THAT? YOU OBVIOUSLY ON A RAP SITE. COUNTLESS SURENOS TRYIN' TO RAP. WHAT'S YOUR POINT? IT SHOULD BE BLAK AND BROWN UNITED.
YOU'VE BEEN IN THE CLINK CLICCIN' UP WITH TOO MANY ARYAN BROTHERHOOD WHITEBOYS. WHAT IF KORPS 559 OR N-E NORTHERN CALI FOLK SOAK UP SOME gAME FROM BLAK FOLK? WHAT'S WRONg WITH THAT? YOU OBVIOUSLY ON A RAP SITE. COUNTLESS SURENOS TRYIN' TO RAP. WHAT'S YOUR POINT? IT SHOULD BE BLAK AND BROWN UNITED.
If the disorder was a single gene polymorphism or some other frequent mutation, then there definitely would be more like them. However, this trait may be the cause of numerous gene mutations (resulting in loss of function proteins), which could result in an extremely rare disorder (the chance of one gene mutation occuring would be high, but if ten genes were responsible, the chances of all ten mutations occuring would be extremely low).
You've got a good point though, in the sense that if it did require the mutation of multiple genes, why would all of the members of this family contain the same mutations? If they were identical twins, then the mutations could have occured early enough to affect all of the individuals. The fact that they are not identical twins suggests that it may not be genetic.
Evolution itself can occur in a variety of ways - in it's most common form, minor changes in one species over numerous generations results in the accumulation of mutations and a noticeable difference in the phenotype (whether increased tolerance to cold, longer neck, less fur etc.). However, consider the scenario where a specific gene which is responsible for homeobox characteristics (basic layout and structure of the organism), slowly changes over several thousand years and results in an animal with a longer neck (i.e. giraffe). You could thus attribute long necks to this specific gene. If this gene was knocked out, then the giraffe with the mutation would have a small neck. This same sort of knockout may have happened in this case with the humans.
You've got a good point though, in the sense that if it did require the mutation of multiple genes, why would all of the members of this family contain the same mutations? If they were identical twins, then the mutations could have occured early enough to affect all of the individuals. The fact that they are not identical twins suggests that it may not be genetic.
Evolution itself can occur in a variety of ways - in it's most common form, minor changes in one species over numerous generations results in the accumulation of mutations and a noticeable difference in the phenotype (whether increased tolerance to cold, longer neck, less fur etc.). However, consider the scenario where a specific gene which is responsible for homeobox characteristics (basic layout and structure of the organism), slowly changes over several thousand years and results in an animal with a longer neck (i.e. giraffe). You could thus attribute long necks to this specific gene. If this gene was knocked out, then the giraffe with the mutation would have a small neck. This same sort of knockout may have happened in this case with the humans.
Armenia 4 lyfe, i hope they all end up on all fours. Looks like a fake story to me or else they have back problems