PDA

View Full Version : Genetic study of house dust mites demonstrates reversible evolution



Chris
03-10-2013, 05:50 PM
http://i.snag.gy/K9Usq.jpg


In evolutionary biology, there is a deeply rooted supposition that you can't go home again: Once an organism has evolved specialized traits, it can't return to the lifestyle of its ancestors.

There's even a name for this pervasive idea. Dollo's law states that evolution is unidirectional and irreversible. But this "law" is not universally accepted and is the topic of heated debate among biologists.

Now a research team led by two University of Michigan biologists has used a large-scale genetic study of the lowly house dust mite to uncover an example of reversible evolution that appears to violate Dollo's law.

The study shows that tiny free-living house dust mites, which thrive in the mattresses, sofas and carpets of even the cleanest homes, evolved from parasites, which in turn evolved from free-living organisms millions of years ago....

@ Genetic study of house dust mites demonstrates reversible evolution (http://phys.org/news/2013-03-genetic-house-mites-reversible-evolution.html#jCp)


Not sure why this is surprising, evolution, as adaptation, is not progressive.

Captain Obvious
03-10-2013, 07:08 PM
If adaptation requires regression, wouldn't this theory be self contradictory?

Or are they suggesting that evolution ceases when adaptation's only route is regression?

Captain Obvious
03-10-2013, 07:08 PM
That mite looks like a muppet, btw.

Dr. Who
03-10-2013, 08:25 PM
http://i.snag.gy/K9Usq.jpg



@ Genetic study of house dust mites demonstrates reversible evolution (http://phys.org/news/2013-03-genetic-house-mites-reversible-evolution.html#jCp)


Not sure why this is surprising, evolution, as adaptation, is not progressive.
Adaptation is just that, adaptation. Whatever works to preserve the species. Progressive is relative.

Chris
03-10-2013, 08:46 PM
Progress and regress are relative--whatever that means, neither is connected to evolutionary theory.


What needs to be understood is that they were once free-living, evolved to become parasitic, and have now evolved to be free-living again. The free-living beginning and the free-living ending may have little to do with each other, other than some abstract human concept about free-living vs parasitic.

Dr. Who
03-10-2013, 09:49 PM
Progress and regress are relative--whatever that means, neither is connected to evolutionary theory.


What needs to be understood is that they were once free-living, evolved to become parasitic, and have now evolved to be free-living again. The free-living beginning and the free-living ending may have little to do with each other, other than some abstract human concept about free-living vs parasitic.
Just means they adapt in order to survive whatever life throws at them. They are a successful species. Progress is a human concept implying more intelligent or some such distinction, which is rather irrelevant in nature. Survival is everything.

Calypso Jones
03-10-2013, 10:13 PM
Progress and regress are relative--whatever that means, neither is connected to evolutionary theory.


What needs to be understood is that they were once free-living, evolved to become parasitic, and have now evolved to be free-living again. The free-living beginning and the free-living ending may have little to do with each other, other than some abstract human concept about free-living vs parasitic.

that's all conjecture. They weren't there. Scientists will say anything to back up their agenda...they better otherwise they are ostracized outta the business.