Evolution Test!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dr.Trax
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 445
  • Views Views 62K

Do you believe in Evolution?


  • Total voters
    0
Status
Not open for further replies.
A suggestion to evolutionists,atheists,and to even muslims who dont believe in creation
theres gona be an interview with harun yahya @ islamicboard radio,you can post your questions there,he can answer them better than any of us on the forums.and i can assure you it will be worth it.this is his speciality...you can post your questions here
http://www.islamicboard.com/islamicboard-radio-24-7/134284794-harun-yahya-interview-25-07-09-a.html
you can visit his website and read free online material here
www.harunyahya.com
 
Salam,
No I do not believe in the evolutation. I feel that wouldn't make me a Muslim if I did.
 
Featured Books



Why Evolution Is True

Jerry A. Coyne

Book Description

Among the wonders that science has uncovered about the universe, no subject has sparked more fascination and fury than evolution. In all the current highly publicized debates about creationism and its descendant "intelligent design," there is an element of the controversy that is rarely mentioned--the evidence, the empirical truth of evolution by natural selection. Even Richard Dawkins and Stephen Jay Gould, while extolling the beauty of evolution and examining case studies, have not focused on the evidence itself. Yet the proof is vast, varied, and magnificent, drawn from many different fields of science. Scientists are observing species splitting into two and are finding more and more fossils capturing change in the past--dinosaurs that have sprouted feathers, fish that have grown limbs.

Why Evolution Is True weaves together the many threads of modern work in genetics, paleontology, geology, molecular biology, and anatomy that demonstrate the "indelible stamp" of the processes first proposed by Darwin. In crisp, lucid prose accessible to a wide audience, Why Evolution Is True dispels common misunderstandings and fears about evolution and clearly confirms that this amazing process of change has been firmly established as a scientific truth.

Why Evolution is True is a succinct and accessible exposition of the facts supporting Darwinian evolution.
Contents

Preface xi

Introduction xv

1. What is Evolution? 1

2. Written in the Rocks 20

3. Remnants: Vestiges, Embryos, and Bad Design 55

4. The Geography of Life 86

5. The Engine of Evolution 111

6. How Sex Drives Evolution 144

7. The Origin of the Species 168

8. What About Us? 190

9. Evolution Redux 221

Notes 235

Glossary 247

Suggestions for Further Reading 251

References 257

Illustration Credits 271

Index 273
 
nice intro.. can you espouse genetics and molecular biology to make a case for macro evolution (not Mendeliantype genetics) and elucidate this mysterious speciation that has you at cockroach one day and then a rabbit the next! ... I don't feel like paying $64 for a book that is about poetic observation than actualized demonstrable science.
 
The question is very ambiguous. If the original poster defines evolution as the change in genetic frequency of a trait over time then I agree that it exists. BUT if the original poster defines evolution as the process which results in diversity of species from a common ancestor through mutation accumulation and natural selection working together then I do not accept it on scientific grounds. For the moment, I have voted No because I assume that the OP was asking if I believed in the latter definition.

From a scientific and experimental perspective, I have to see an experiment where one species changes into another purely on the basis of natural selection of genetic variation. I also await the scientific world to present to me the true transition forms and not pseudo-transitions forms. By transition forms, I mean to see fossils which highlight the graded changes in emergence of new species, for example from Great Apes to humans. Sometimes evolution, as the biologists say, is very quick and we might not have graded intermediates but what determines whether gradual changes will take place or quick jumps. As someone with training in the sciences, I would like to see evidence (genetic, anatomical, physiological, behavioral, immunological etc) to which clearly shows that natural selection and mutations were responsible for the emergence of Homo sapiens from its ancestors.

One supposed evidence is that of number of chromosomes in humans is 46 while in 3 families of chimps it is 48. So our ancestor had 48 and two chromosomes joined together to form 46 and gave humans. This is shown by testing the markers present on the joined-chromosome in question in humans and comparing them with the two separate chromosomes in the other species. I do not accept this sort of evidence as a proof that this event REALLY happened in historical domain. It is true that the chromosomal difference exists but is it true that it happened in reality by the virtue of mutation and natural selections? Moreover, I would like to see such a claim being test in the lab. I would like to see a monkey zygote with 48 chromsomes in which 2 chromosomes are joined together, just like how they are in humans, under controlled situation and see if that zygote develops in to a human baby or a monkey baby.
 
For the experiment proposed, I will also give the leeway to make OTHER changes in genome of monkey zygote, which are unique to humans, in order for that altered zygote genome to fulfill all the requirements of developing into a human embryo.
 
From a scientific and experimental perspective, I have to see an experiment where one species changes into another purely on the basis of natural selection of genetic variation.
Dobzhansky T, Pavlovsky O. Experimentally created incipient species of Drosophila. Nature. 1971 Apr 2;230(5292):289–292.

One supposed evidence is that of number of chromosomes in humans is 46 while in 3 families of chimps it is 48. So our ancestor had 48 and two chromosomes joined together to form 46 and gave humans. This is shown by testing the markers present on the joined-chromosome in question in humans and comparing them with the two separate chromosomes in the other species. I do not accept this sort of evidence as a proof that this event REALLY happened in historical domain.
How else would you reasonably explain it?
I'm sure you're aware that each chromosome has telomeres at the ends and a centromere somewhere near the middle. How do your views explain why that particular human chromosome looks almost identical to two chromosomes found in chimpanzees but fused together, complete with a group of telomeres in the middle and two centromeres?
 
Dobzhansky T, Pavlovsky O. Experimentally created incipient species of Drosophila. Nature. 1971 Apr 2;230(5292):289–292.

& let me quote the article:
'species formation through doubling of the chromosomal hybrid is however, not the usual method of speciation'
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/pagerender.fcgi?artid=224220&pageindex=2

directly manipulating in an artificial environment can't be made akin to spontaneous generation... I have played around with Genomic fingerprinting using arbitrarily primed PCR to identify new polymorphisms in certain bacteria.. we still can't call that speciation!
How else would you reasonably explain it?
Explain what?

I'm sure you're aware that each chromosome has telomeres at the ends and a centromere somewhere near the middle. How do your views explain why that particular human chromosome looks almost identical to two chromosomes found in chimpanzees but fused together, complete with a group of telomeres in the middle and two centromeres?

What does a telomere at the end of a chromosome do exactly to enable the process of speciation? can you articulate that in simple words so that us Bedouins can grasp your worldly concepts?

all the best
 
Thanks for taking an interest but my questions were for the attention of Wa7abiScientist. :)
 
not a problem at all (although it is a public forum and the private messaging system exists for duologues and even soliloquies away from the prying eyes of others). I'll leave the link above in case Wa7abi takes you up on your offer of ' experimental creation' and how it conduces 'speciation'

all the best
 
You make a fair point, it's a public forum. I just thought it might make for an easier 'flow' of conversation if it wasn't split several ways.
directly manipulating in an artificial environment can't be made akin to spontaneous generation...
Could you explain what you mean by 'directly manipulating'? It isn't the phrase I would have used to describe this so I'm curious about why you have.

In his earlier post about speciation Wa7abi specified only 'an experiment'. I can't see how an experiment involving flies and speciation could occur outside an artificial environment without losing some measure of control or integrity.
Explain what?
What does a telomere at the end of a chromosome do exactly to enable the process of speciation? can you articulate that in simple words so that us Bedouins can grasp your worldly concepts?
The question put by Wa7abi is whether or not Human chromosome 2 is really a product of the fusion of two chromosomes in an ancestor species.

Human chromosome 2 is very similar to chimpanzee chromosomes 2a and 2b laid end to end.
Human chromosome 2 has the remains of telomeres in the middle of the chromosome, in the place they would be if 2a and 2b were fused.
Human chromosome 2 has a centromere in the same place as 2a, and the remains of a centromere in the place equivalent to the centromere of 2b

Chromosome_2.jpg


My question to Wa7abi was essentially "If you don't think chromosome fusion occurred, what explanation fits the evidence?"
 
You make a fair point, it's a public forum. I just thought it might make for an easier 'flow' of conversation if it wasn't split several ways.
Indeed!
Could you explain what you mean by 'directly manipulating'? It isn't the phrase I would have used to describe this so I'm curious about why you have.
I don't think the term has more than one meaning.. to determine the existence of vs. your chosen 'Dobzhansky T, Pavlovsky O. Experimentally created'

In his earlier post about speciation Wa7abi specified only 'an experiment'. I can't see how an experiment involving flies and speciation could occur outside an artificial environment without losing some measure of control or integrity.
I wrote based on thread title not wa7abi's comments. You can't really concede that evolution/speciation occurs naturally and by the same breath introduce its paradox as means of its occurrence.
The question put by Wa7abi is whether or not Human chromosome 2 is really a product of the fusion of two chromosomes in an ancestor species.
We'll leave wa7abi to answer that, however, chromosomal fusion and or breaks or translocations as we know of today give us a state of disease not speciation a few examples as occurring in one sub-class, I'll choose PML as it is quite the expansive topic and I don't wish to cover each pathology that happens from fusion/break/translocation.

Molecular biology of acute promyelocytic leukemia

Authors
Wendy Stock, MD
Michael J Thirman, MD Section Editor
Richard A Larson, MD Deputy Editor
Rebecca F Connor, MD



Last literature review version 16.3: September 2008 | This topic last updated: June 9, 2008 (More)


INTRODUCTION — The cytogenetic hallmark of acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL), FAB-M3 in the French-American-British classification of acute myeloid leukemia (AML), is a translocation involving the retinoic acid receptor-alpha (RAR-alpha, RARa) locus on chromosome 17 [1] . The vast majority of these cases contain t(15;17)(q22;q11.12), although several variant translocations involving RARa have been identified, including t(11;17) and t(5;17) [2-4] . (See "Variant translocations" below). Distinguishing between these translocations is important because patients with the variant translocation t(11;17)(q23;q11.12) are almost invariably resistant to ATRA [2,3,5] . (See "Clinical manifestations, pathologic features, and diagnosis of acute promyelocytic leukemia in adults").

The molecular biology of APL will be discussed here. The molecular biology of acute myeloid leukemias other than APL and of ALL are discussed separately. (See "Pathobiology of acute myeloid leukemia" and see "Cytogenetics in acute lymphoblastic leukemia").

RETINOIC ACID AND THE RETINOIC ACID RECEPTOR — Retinoic acid is a critical ligand in the differentiation pathway of multiple tissues, mediated through binding to a retinoic acid receptor (RAR). RARs belong to the nuclear steroid/thyroid hormone receptor superfamily, and possess a modular structure with discrete ligand binding and DNA binding domains. Of the three isoforms of RARs, RARalpha (RARa) is expressed primarily in hematopoietic cells.

RARa is a member of a family of retinoid-binding transcription factors (including RXR) that regulate gene expression. RARa contains a series of discrete functional domains, including an amino terminal transcriptional activation domain, followed by DNA-binding, dimerization, and retinoid-binding domains. RARa heterodimerizes with retinoid X receptor (RXR), and binds to retinoic acid responsive elements to regulate transcription of target genes [5] .

In the absence of retinoic acid, RARa/RXR-alpha heterodimers interact with N-CoR (nuclear corepressor), a ubiquitous nuclear protein which mediates transcriptional repression [2,6] . Retinoic acid dissociates N-CoR from RARa/RXR-alpha, resulting in relief from transcriptional repression, presumably activating genes that lead to terminal differentiation of promyelocytes (show bone marrow 1A-1B) [6,7] .

The capacity of retinoids to induce myeloid differentiation was recognized prior to the identification of the involvement of RARa in APL. Retinoic acid had been shown to enhance the growth of normal myeloid progenitors, to induce differentiation of the HL-60 promyelocytic cell line, and to induce terminal differentiation of primary human APL cells cultured in vitro [8-10] . Subsequently, the use of all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) was found to induce complete remissions in patients with APL. (See "Clinical manifestations, pathologic features, and diagnosis of acute promyelocytic leukemia in adults", section on Initial treatment).

Rather than inducing cell death from cytotoxicity, ATRA induces differentiation of the malignant promyelocytic clone, an effect which can be observed in vitro and in vivo [11-13] . The effect in retinoic acid-sensitive NB4 cells in vivo is complex [14] , with ATRA modulating 169 genes in one study [12] . Although complete remission can be obtained with ATRA alone, most patients will ultimately relapse without additional cytotoxic chemotherapy. The basis for development of ATRA resistance remains unclear, but this phenomenon suggests that additional genetic events might occur in APL cells that confer resistance. The use of arsenic trioxide has also been shown to induce remissions in APL, possibly by inducing the degradation of PML/RARa. (See "Clinical manifestations, pathologic features, and diagnosis of acute promyelocytic leukemia in adults", section on Arsenic trioxide).

T(15;17) THE USUAL TRANSLOCATION IN APL — The leukemic cells of approximately 92 percent of patients with APL have the balanced translocation t(15;17)(q22;q11.12) involving the retinoic acid receptor-alpha (RAR-alpha, RARa) gene on chromosome 17 and the PML gene on chromosome 15 [3,5] . An additional 5 percent do not have the classic t(15;17), but have the PML/RARalpha fusion gene, due to insertions or other complex chromosomal rearrangements [15] .

The PML gene — The ProMyelocytic Leukemia (PML) gene was first identified through its involvement with RARa in t(15;17) [16,17] . It is expressed ubiquitously, and multiple alternative splice variants have been isolated. The normal function of PML is not known, but overexpression of PML inhibits growth in cell lines, perhaps through the interferon-gamma signaling pathway [18] . Several studies have suggested the following properties for the gene [19-21] : It is critical for the proper localization of all other ND10-associated proteins under physiological conditions It encodes a growth- and tumour-suppresor protein that is essential for several apoptotic signals It acts as a transcriptional co-activator with p53, the tumor suppressor gene

The product of the PML gene is a nuclear protein that contains motifs suggestive of a role in control of RNA transcription, including two putative amino terminal DNA-binding domains and a potential dimerization domain. It is normally expressed in myeloid progenitors, and has been shown to localize to a discrete subnuclear compartment of unknown function, referred to as the nuclear body [22] .

The nuclear body is a novel nuclear structure referred to by several names, including PODs (PML oncogenic domains), or ND10 (nuclear domain 10) [22,23] . In APL cells, the integrity of the nuclear body is disrupted, and a microspeckled distribution of PML/RARa is observed. Treatment of APL cells with ATRA causes the nuclear bodies to be regenerated with proper relocalization of PML. Arsenic trioxide has also been found to target PML and PML/RARa to nuclear bodies and to induce their degradation [24] . Thus, restoration of nuclear body structures by either ATRA or arsenic trioxide correlates with the ability of these agents to induce remission of APL.

The fusion genes of t(15;17) — Two novel fusion genes are formed as a result of the t(15;17): a PML/RARa gene on the der(15) chromosome and an RARa/PML gene on the der(17) [16,17] . Whereas the PML/RARa fusion gene is found consistently in all cases of t(15;17), the reciprocal RARa/PML fusion can be detected in only 80 percent of cases [25] , due in some cases to loss of the der(17) chromosome. Although this suggests that the RARa/PML fusion may not be essential in the pathogenesis of APL, its expression has been postulated to represent a potential second genetic event contributing to the leukemic phenotype.

The resulting fusion gene on der(15) encodes a fusion protein in which the DNA-binding and dimerization domains of PML are fused to the DNA-binding and C-terminal portions of RAR-alpha, including the retinoid binding site. Breakpoints in RARa typically occur within intron 2, whereas breakpoints in PML are more heterogeneous, occurring within intron 3, intron 6, or exon 6, producing what has been called short, long, and variable forms [26,27] . The three different isoforms have somewhat different clinical characteristics; lack of sufficient numbers of patients with the less common variable form has made it difficult to determine whether the three isoforms have similar clinical outcomes [26-28] .

Mechanism of action of PML/RARa — The PML/RARa protein functions as an aberrant retinoid receptor that possesses altered DNA binding and transcriptional regulatory properties [29,30] . PML/RARa can heterodimerize with RXR and bind to retinoic acid responsive elements in target genes. Expression of PML/RARa blocks retinoic acid induced myeloid differentiation [31] .

In addition, PML/RARa can block RARa mediated transactivation in a dominant negative manner. This dominant negative effect on normal RARa mediated functions is supported by experiments where a dominant negative mutation of RARa was introduced into a murine hematopoietic cell line [32] . A block in differentiation along the neutrophil and monocytic lineages was observed, and a switch to the development of mast cells and basophils occurred.

Experiments in transgenic mice demonstrated that expression of PML/RARa in immature myeloid cells resulted in the development of a leukemia with promyelocytic features, thereby demonstrating the leukemogenic potential of the fusion protein [33] . Expression of a PML/RARa variant that is unable to activate transcription in response to retinoic acid also leads to leukemia; however, the leukemia does not differentiate in response to retinoic acid [34] . Several groups have generated transgenic mice expressing PML/RARa under the control of various myeloid-specific promoters. The phenotype in these mice depended on the stage of myeloid differentiation where the transgene was expressed: In mice with the transgene expressed under the control of the human MRP8 promoter, which drives expression in early myeloid progenitors as well as in mature neutrophils and monocytes, neutrophil numbers were normal, but differentiation was impaired. Approximately 30 percent developed acute leukemia with a latency of three to nine months; remission of the leukemia could be induced by ATRA [33] . Two groups have generated transgenic mice expressing PML/RARa under the control of the human cathepsin G promoter, which drives expression in promonocytes and promyelocytes. These mice develop elevated numbers of immature myeloid cells in the bone marrow and peripheral blood. Approximately 10 to 30 percent develop leukemia with a latency of 12 to 14 months [35,36] . Treatment of these mice with ATRA caused apoptosis of myeloid precursors rather than differentiation. Transgenic mice expressing PML-RARa under the control of the CD11b promoter have also been generated [37] . This promoter drives expression in later stages of myeloid differentiation. These mice do not develop leukemia and have normal numbers and maturation of myeloid cells. However, the ability of these mice to regenerate granulocytes following sublethal irradiation was impaired.

Comparison of the phenotypes observed in the different transgenic mice reveals that the timing of PML-RARa expression during myeloid differentiation is a critical determinant in the development of leukemia. In addition, the relatively low frequency and long latency period for development of leukemia imply that genetic events in addition to the expression of PML-RARa are necessary in order for APL to occur [38,39] .

The precise way in which the fusion protein functions as an oncoprotein is incompletely understood. The two isoforms, PML/RARa and RARa/PML, have only subtle differences in function [40] . PML/RARa shows reduced sensitivity to retinoic acid in terms of dissociation of N-CoR [6] . This could lead to persistent transcriptional repression, thereby preventing differentiation of promyelocytes. Pharmacologic concentrations of retinoic acid, as used in the treatment of APL, result in dissociation of N-CoR, presumably permitting differentiation of the leukemic cells [6] .

The binding of the protein product of PML/RARa is thought to repress gene transcription through epigenomic changes including histone deacetylation or methylation [41] . A mechanism which includes the recruitment of a histone deacetylase may have therapeutic implications because in vitro studies have shown that resistance to all-trans retinoic acid can be overcome by the addition of a histone deacetylase inhibitor [42,43] . In addition, case reports and small trials have reported clinical responses to histone deacetylase inhibitors [44,45] . (See "Clinical manifestations, pathologic features, and diagnosis of acute promyelocytic leukemia in adults" section on Inhibition of histone deacetylase).

PML/RARa also may prolong the survival of the leukemic cells, perhaps in part by leading to downregulation of tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFa) receptors, thereby minimizing TNFa-induced apoptosis [46] . On the hand, PML/RARa in the presence of retinoic acid induces apoptosis in association with reduced levels of BCL-2 which normally protects against apoptosis [40] .

In support of this hypothesis are results obtained with mouse [47] and human [48] multipotent hematopoietic progenitor cells/stem cells (HPC/HSC) transfected in vitro with a retroviral vector containing PML/RARa cDNA. Expression of the PML/RARa fusion protein in human cells dictated the APL phenotype through the following effects [48] : Rapid induction of human HPC/HSC differentiation to the promyelocytic stage Maturation arrest at the promyelocytic stage, which was abolished by retinoic acid Reprogramming of HPC commitment to preferential granulopoietic differentiation irrespective of the hematopoietic growth factor (HGF)

stimulus Protection of HPC from apoptosis induced by HGF deprivation.

VARIANT TRANSLOCATIONS — A number of variant translocations have been described in APL, t(11;17)(q23;q11.12), t(5;17)(q35;q11.12), and t(11;17)(q13;q11.12).

PLZF/RARa and t(11;17) — A variant translocation t(11;17)(q23;q11.12) has been described in approximately one percent of patients with APL [15,49] . In these tumors, the 3' end of the RARa gene is fused to the 5' end of a gene called PLZF (promyelocytic leukemia zinc finger), which encodes a polypeptide containing nine zinc fingers, a motif frequently found in transcription factors. PLZF is expressed in myeloid but not lymphoid lineages, and its expression has been found to be downregulated during differentiation. Unlike PML, PLZF is not a component of nuclear bodies, but is localized in smaller, more numerous nuclear subdomains.

The PLZF/RARa fusion gene is predicted to encode a protein consisting of the amino terminal portion of PLZF, including several zinc fingers, and the same carboxy terminal portion of RARa that is fused to PML in cells having t(15;17). The PLZF/RARa fusion protein antagonizes the normal function of RARa/RXR-alpha heterodimers, suggesting that it behaves as a dominant negative mutant [50] .

Although the number of cases studied is small, APL with t(11;17)(q23;q11.12) is usually refractory to therapy with retinoids, in contrast to the great majority of APL cases with the more common t(15;17) [2,51] . As noted above, PML/RARa in t(15;17) shows reduced sensitivity to retinoic acid, but this can be overcome by pharmacological concentrations of retinoic acid. In contrast, pharmacological concentrations of retinoic acid do not induce dissociation of N-CoR from PLZF/RARa, leading to persistent transcription repression and prevention of differentiation [6,52] .

NPM/RARa and t(5;17) — A rare (less than 0.5 percent) variant translocation in APL has been described, t(5;17)(q35;q11.12), in which the nucleophosmin (NPM) gene was fused to RARa [15,53] . NPM is a nucleolar phosphoprotein that is involved in ribosomal ribonucleoprotein processing and transport. NPM is also involved in the t(2;5)(p23;q35) in anaplastic large cell lymphoma, where it fuses to the ALK gene. In addition, NPM has been found to fuse to the MLF1 gene in t(3;5)(q25.1;q35) in AML. Patients with this translocation are responsive to ATRA therapy [5] .

NuMA/RARa and t(11;17) — In the translocation t(11;17)(q13;q11.12), the Nuclear matrix-mitotic apparatus protein gene (NuMA) is fused with RARa [5] . Unlike t(11;17)(q23;q11.12), this variant appears responsive to ATRA [54] .

STAT5b/RARa and interstitial chromosome 17 deletion — A rare fusion between STAT5b (signal transducer and activator of transcription 5b) and RARa was found in a patient with an interstitial chromosome 17 deletion and an ATRA-resistant form of APL [55-57] .


Use of UpToDate is subject to the Subscription and License Agreement. REFERENCES
de The, H, Chomienne, C, Lanotte, M, et al. The t(15;17) translocation of acute promyelocytic leukaemia fuses the retinoic acid receptor alpha gene to a novel transcribed locus. Nature 1990; 347:558. Collins, SJ. Acute promyelocytic leukemia: Relieving repression induces remission. Blood 1998; 91:2631. Melnick, A, Licht, JD. Deconstructing a disease: RARalpha, its fusion partners, and their roles in the pathogenesis of acute promyelocytic leukemia. Blood 1999; 93:3167. Grimwade, D. The pathogenesis of acute promyelocytic leukaemia: Evaluation of the role of molecular diagnosis and monitoring in the management of the disease [Review]. Br J Haematol 1999; 106:591. Grignani, F, Fagioli, M, Alcalay, M, et al. Acute promyelocytic leukemia: From genetics to treatment. Blood 1994; 83:10. Guidez, F, Ivins, S, Zhu, J, et al. Reduced retinoic acid sensitivities of nuclear receptor corepressor binding to PML- and PLZF-RAR-alpha underlie molecular pathogenesis and treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia. Blood 1998; 91:2634. Mueller, BU, Pabst, T, Fos, J, et al. ATRA resolves the differentiation block in t(15;17) acute myeloid leukemia by restoring PU.1 expression. Blood 2006; 107:3330. Breitman, TR, Collins, SJ, Keene, BR. Terminal differentiation of human promyelocytic leukemic cells in primary culture in response to retinoic acid. Blood 1981; 57:1000. Robertson, KA, Emami, B, Mueller, L, Collins, SJ. Multiple members of the retinoic acid receptor family are capable of mediating the granulocytic differentiation of HL-60 cells. Mol Cell Biol 1992; 12:3743. Gratas, C, Menot, ML, Dresch, C, Chomienne, C. Retinoid acid supports granulocytic but not erythroid differentiation of myeloid progenitors in normal bone marrow cells. Leukemia 1993; 7:1156. Warrell, RP Jr, de The, H, Wang, ZY, et al. Acute promyelocytic leukemia. N Engl J Med 1993; 329:177. Liu, TX, Zhang, JW, Tao, J, et al. Gene expression networks underlying retinoic acid-induced differentiation of acute promyelocytic leukemia cells. Blood 2000; 96:1496. Cassinat, B, Chevret, S, Zassadowski, F, Balitrand, N. In vitro all-trans retinoic acid sensitivity of acute promyelocytic leukemia blasts: a novel indicator of poor patient outcome. Blood 2001; 98:2862. Altucci, L, Rossin, A, Raffelsberger, W, et al. Retinoic acid-induced apoptosis in leukemia cells is mediated by paracrine action of tumor-selective death ligand TRAIL. Nat Med 2001; 7:680. Grimwade, D, Biondi, A, Mozziconacci, MJ, et al. Characterization of acute promyelocytic leukemia cases lacking the classic t(15;17): results of the european working party. Blood 2000; 96:1297. de The, H, Lavau, C, Marchio, A, et al. The PML-RAR alpha fusion mRNA generated by the t(15;17) translocation in acute promyelocytic leukemia encodes a functionally altered RAR. Cell 1991; 66:675. Kakizuka, A, Miller, WH, Umesono, K, et al. Chromosomal translocation t(15;17) in human acute promyelocytic leukemia fuses RAR alpha with a novel putative transcription factor, PML. Cell 1991; 66:663. Choi, YH, Bernardi, R, Pandolfi, PP, Benveniste, EN. The promyelocytic leukemia protein functions as a negative regulator of IFN-gamma signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006; 103:18715. Maul, GG, Negorev, D, Bell, P, Ishov, AM. Review: properties and assembly mechanisms of ND10, PML bodies, or PODs. J Struct Biol 2000; 129:278. Guo, A, Salomoni, P, Luo, J, et al. The function of PML in p53-dependent apoptosis. Nat Cell Biol 2000; 2:730. Zhong, S, Salomoni, P, Ronchetti, S, et al. Promyelocytic leukemia protein (PML) and Daxx participate in a novel nuclear pathway for apoptosis. J Exp Med 2000; 191:631. Weis, K, Rambaud, S, Lavau, C, et al. Retinoic acid regulates aberrant nuclear localization of the PML-RAR alpha in acute promyelocytic leukemia. Cell 1994; 76:345. Dyck, JA, Maul, GG, Miller, Jr WH, et al. A novel macromolecular structure is a target of the promyelocyte-retinoic acid receptor oncoprotein. Cell 1994; 76:333. Zhu, J, Koken, MH, Quignon, F, et al. Arsenic-induced PML targeting onto nuclear bodies: implications for the treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997; 94:3978. Goddard, AD, Borrow, J, Freemont, PS, Solomon, E. Characterization of a zinc finger gene disrupted by the t(15;17) in acute promyelocytic leukemia. Science 1991; 254:1371. Gallagher, RE, Willman, CL, Slack, JL, et al. Association of PML-RAR alpha fusion mRNA type with pretreatment hematologic characteristics but not treatment outcome in acute promyelocytic leukemia: an intergroup molecular study. Blood 1997; 90:1656. Slack, JL, Willman, CL, Andersen, JW, et al. Molecular analysis and clinical outcome of adult APL patients with the type V PML-RARalpha isoform: results from intergroup protocol 0129. Blood 2000; 95:398. Gonzalez, M, Barragan, E, Bolufer, P, et al. Pretreatment characteristics and clinical outcome of acute promyelocytic leukaemia patients according to the PML-RARalpha isoforms: a study of the PETHEMA group. Br J Haematol 2001; 114:99. Perez, A, Kastner, P, Sethi, S, et al. PMLRAR homodimers: Distinct DNA binding properties and heteromeric interactions with RXR. EMBO J 1993; 12:3171. Cote, S, Zhou, D, Bianchini, A, et al. Altered ligand binding and transcriptional regulation by mutations in the PML/RARalpha ligand-binding domain arising in retinoic acid-resistant patients with acute promyelocytic leukemia. Blood 2000; 96:3200. Grignani, F, Ferrucci, PF, Testa, U, et al. The acute promyelocytic leukemia-specific PML-RAR alpha fusion protein inhibits differentiation and promotes survival of myeloid precursor cells. Cell 1993; 74:423. Tsai, S, Bartelmez, S, Heyman, R, et al. A mutated retinoic acid receptor-alpha exhibiting dominant-negative activity alters the lineage development of a multipotent hematopoietic cell line. Genes Dev 1992; 6:2258. Brown, D, Kogan, S, Lagasse, E, et al. A PMLRARalpha transgene initiates murine acute promyelocytic leukemia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997; 94:2551. Kogan, SC, Hong, Sh, Shultz, DB, et al. Leukemia initiated by PMLRARalpha: the PML domain plays a critical role while retinoic acid-mediated transactivation is dispensable. Blood 2000; 95:1541. Grisolano, JL, Wesselschmidt, RL, Pelicci, PG, Ley, TJ. Altered myeloid development and acute leukemia in transgenic mice expressing PML-RAR alpha under control of cathepsin G regulatory sequences. Blood 1997; 89:376. He, LZ, Tribioli, C, Rivi, R, et al. Acute leukemia with promyelocytic features in PML/RARalpha transgenic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997; 94:5302. Early, E, Moore, MA, Kakizuka, A, et al. Transgenic expression of PML/RARalpha impairs myelopoiesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996; 93:7900. Kogan, SC, Brown, DE, Shultz, DB, et al. BCL-2 Cooperates with Promyelocytic Leukemia Retinoic Acid Receptor alpha Chimeric Protein (PMLRARalpha) to Block Neutrophil Differentiation and Initiate Acute Leukemia. J Exp Med 2001; 193:531. Le Beau, MM, Bitts, S, Davis, EM, Kogan, SC. Recurring chromosomal abnormalities in leukemia in PML-RARA transgenic mice parallel human acute promyelocytic leukemia. Blood 2002; 99:2985. Slack, JL, Yu, M. Constitutive expression of the promyelocytic leukemia-associated oncogene PML/RAR-alpha in TF1 cells: Isoform-specific and retinoic acid-dependent effects on growth, bcl-2 expression, and apoptosis. Blood 1998; 91:3347. Hoemme, C, Peerzada, A, Behre, G, et al. Chromatin modifications induced by PML-RARalpha repress critical targets in leukemogenesis as analyzed by ChIP-Chip. Blood 2008; 111:2887. Lin, RJ, Nagy, L, Inoue, S, et al. Role of the histone deacetylase complex in acute promyelocytic leukemia. Nature 1998; 391:811. Grignani, F, De Matteis, S, Nervi, C, et al. Fusion proteins of the retinoic acid receptor-alpha recruit histone deacetylase in promyelocytic leukemia. Nature 1998; 391:815. Warrell, RP, He, LZ, Richon, V, et al. Therapeutic targeting of transcription in acute promyelocytic leukemia by use of an inhibitor of histone deacetylase. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90:1621. Bug, G, Ritter, M, Wassmann, B, et al. Clinical trial of valproic acid and all-trans retinoic acid in patients with poor-risk acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer 2005; 104:2717. Testa, U, Grignani, F, Samoggia, P, et al. The PML/RAR-alpha fusion protein inhibits tumor necrosis factor-alpha-induced apoptosis in U937 cells and acute promyelocytic leukemia blasts. J Clin Invest 1998; 101:2278. Minucci, S, Monestiroli, S, Giavara, S, et al. PML-RAR induces promyelocytic leukemias with high efficiency following retroviral gene transfer into purified murine hematopoietic progenitors. Blood 2002; 100:2989. Grignani, F, Valtieri, M, Gabbianelli, M, et al. PML/RAR alpha fusion protein expression in normal human hematopoietic progenitors dictates myeloid commitment and the promyelocytic phenotype. Blood 2000; 96:1531. Chen, Z, Brand, NJ, Chen, A, et al. Fusion between a novel Kruppel-like zinc finger gene and the retinoic acid receptor-alpha locus due to a variant t(11;17) translocation associated with acute promyelocytic leukemia. EMBO J 1993; 12:1161. Chen, Z, Guidez, F, Rousselot, P, et al. PLZF-RAR alpha fusion proteins generated from the variant t(11;17)(q23;q21) translocation in acute promyelocytic leukemia inhibit ligand-dependent transactivation of wild-type retinoic acid receptors. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1994; 91:1178. Guidez, F, Huang, W, Tong, JH, et al. Poor response to all-trans retinoic acid therapy in a t(11;17) PLZF/RAR alpha patient. Leukemia 1994; 8:12. Licht, JD, Chomienne, C, Goy, A, et al. Clinical and molecular characterization of a rare syndrome of acute promyelocytic leukemia associated with translocation (11;17). Blood 1995; 85:1083. Redner, RL, Rush, EA, Faas, S, et al. The t(5;17) variant of acute promyelocytic leukemia expresses a nucleophosmin-retinoic acid receptor fusion. Blood 1996; 87:882. Wells, RA, Hummel, JL, De Koven, A, et al. A new variant translocation in acute promyelocytic leukaemia: molecular characterization and clinical correlation. Leukemia 1996; 10:735. Arnould, C, Philippe, C, Bourdon, V, et al. The signal transducer and activator of transcription STAT5b gene is a new partner of retinoic acid receptor alpha in acute promyelocytic-like leukaemia. Hum Mol Genet 1999; 8:1741. Dong, S, Tweardy, DJ. Interactions of STAT5b-RARalpha, a novel acute promyelocytic leukemia fusion protein, with retinoic acid receptor and STAT3 signaling pathways. Blood 2002; 99:2637. Collins, SJ. Acute promyelocytic leukemia: STATs, HATs, and HDACs. Blood 2002; 99:2635.

Human chromosome 2 is very similar to chimpanzee chromosomes 2a and 2b laid end to end.
Yes I have seen it all over google.. what is the point?

Human chromosome 2 has the remains of telomeres in the middle of the chromosome, in the place they would be if 2a and 2b were fused.
Human chromosome 2 has a centromere in the same place as 2a, and the remains of a centromere in the place equivalent to the centromere of 2b



My question to Wa7abi was essentially "If you don't think chromosome fusion occurred, what explanation fits the evidence?"

I still don't see what chromosome fusion/breaks/translocations or similarities has to do with speciation?

But to expound on your introduction of 'Telomere' in your previous post..
I'd like to give a quick introduction to function and dysfunction.

Telomeres act as caps to keep the sticky ends of chromosomes from randomly clumping together.. and here is a neat little abstract on the dysfunction leading to cancer (not speciation)

Telomere dysfunction and telomerase activation in cancer - a pathological paradox?
O. Calcagnile, D. Gisselsson

Department of Clinical Genetics, University Hospital, Lund (Sweden)

Address of Corresponding Author
Cytogenet Genome Res 2007;118:270-276 (DOI: 10.1159/000108310)

Abstract.
Telomerase is expressed in more than 90% of human cancers. Telomere maintenance by this enzyme is believed to safeguard genomic integrity in neoplastic cells. Nevertheless, many telomerase-expressing tumours exhibit chromosomal instability triggered by short, dysfunctional telomeres, implying that active telomerase is not sufficient for preserving a functional telosomic nucleoprotein complex in cancer cells. We here examine three possible solutions to this ostensible paradox. First, prior to telomerase activation, telomere erosion may have evolved to a level where telomeric repeat sequences are too short to provide a functional substrate for telomerase enzyme activity. Second, mechanisms other than the continuous telomere erosion counteracted by telomerase may contribute to rapid shortening of telomere repeats. Third, dysfunction of telomere-regulating proteins may result in direct telomere uncapping. Moreover, telomerase may contribute to tumour development also through mechanisms unrelated to telomere length maintenance. Taken together, the available data on the role of telomerase in cancer strongly support that inhibition of this enzyme is a feasible strategy for cancer therapy.
Copyright © 2007 S. Karger AG, Basel


http://content.karger.com/produktedb/produkte.asp?typ=fulltext&file=000108310

Hence my original question, now that we have a brief understanding of what it is, and what happens when it goes awry, of its relation whether in chimps or humans to speciation..

all the best
 
One supposed evidence is that of number of chromosomes in humans is 46 while in 3 families of chimps it is 48. So our ancestor had 48 and two chromosomes joined together to form 46 and gave humans.

Interesting. Even more interesting is how often the obvious is over looked. I wonder how old the scientists, who proposed that theory, were the first time they failed general math?

If you take 48 Chromosomes and join 2 together you do not end up with 46 you end up with 47.But I guess it is easier to explain the math error then it would be to explain how 4 Chomosomes could simultaneously join to form 2 at exactly the same time and be the correct 4 to produce a viable living being.


To get 46 from the 48 (48 minus 4=44 add the 2 new ones made from the 4 and you get 46) You would have to have 4 combine into 2. But from what I have seen so far that in humans there is only one Chromosome that looks like it is the result of combining.

End point it means if the theory is correct we came from a creature with 47 Chromosomes (Doubtful, since Chromosomes usually come in pairs and pairs are an even number what is being seen as a joined chromosome might not be a joined Chromosome ) in any case it is evidence we did not come from chimps as chimps have 48 not 47
 
Interesting. Even more interesting is how often the obvious is over looked. I wonder how old the scientists, who proposed that theory, were the first time they failed general math?

If you take 48 Chromosomes and join 2 together you do not end up with 46 you end up with 47.But I guess it is easier to explain the math error then it would be to explain how 4 Chomosomes could simultaneously join to form 2 at exactly the same time and be the correct 4 to produce a viable living being.


To get 46 from the 48 (48 minus 4=44 add the 2 new ones made from the 4 and you get 46) You would have to have 4 combine into 2. But from what I have seen so far that in humans there is only one Chromosome that looks like it is the result of combining.

End point it means if the theory is correct we came from a creature with 47 Chromosomes (Doubtful, since Chromosomes usually come in pairs and pairs are an even number what is being seen as a joined chromosome might not be a joined Chromosome ) in any case it is evidence we did not come from chimps as chimps have 48 not 47

Indeed, how does the 48 -2(combined)=46????
I am no expert but I think youre right, Wood.
 
Originally Posted by Wa7abiScientist

One supposed evidence is that of number of chromosomes in humans is 46 while in 3 families of chimps it is 48. So our ancestor had 48 and two chromosomes joined together to form 46 and gave humans.
Interesting. Even more interesting is how often the obvious is over looked. I wonder how old the scientists, who proposed that theory, were the first time they failed general math?

If you take 48 Chromosomes and join 2 together you do not end up with 46 you end up with 47.But I guess it is easier to explain the math error then it would be to explain how 4 Chomosomes could simultaneously join to form 2 at exactly the same time and be the correct 4 to produce a viable living being.


To get 46 from the 48 (48 minus 4=44 add the 2 new ones made from the 4 and you get 46) You would have to have 4 combine into 2. But from what I have seen so far that in humans there is only one Chromosome that looks like it is the result of combining.

End point it means if the theory is correct we came from a creature with 47 Chromosomes (Doubtful, since Chromosomes usually come in pairs and pairs are an even number what is being seen as a joined chromosome might not be a joined Chromosome ) in any case it is evidence we did not come from chimps as chimps have 48 not 47

lol.. I didn't even see his original comment...

Math is a little MINOR issue when introducing quasi science.

Here is a really funny video on fusion/translocation in cows ..
by the way leading to low fertility.. 'unbalanced gametes' or death in utero.. none give cows to cocorcoaches or apes to humans ...;D

[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBASt9Kx0fs&feature=related[/MEDIA]
:w:
 
no i don't believe in darwin's theory of evolution.

it was the most boring load of INACCURATE rubbish i ever laid eyes on.

And quite funny also. after two years of studying, as soon as i passed my exams i don't want that biology book to come near my innocent brain again lol
 
I don't think the term has more than one meaning.. to determine the existence of vs. your chosen 'Dobzhansky T, Pavlovsky O. Experimentally created'
The main thing is that the flies were not artificially selected for breeding to induce this change, they were not 'directly manipulated' for this result. Dobzhansky wasn't even aware of it until he collected another batch of flies, possibly years after the speciation event.
You can't really concede that evolution/speciation occurs naturally and by the same breath introduce its paradox as means of its occurrence.
Perhaps you should elaborate, I haven't a clue what you mean by this.
Yes I have seen it all over google.. what is the point?
If you want to try belittle my point by suggesting it's just some valueless waffle spread on the internet then you'll have to address the fact that it is well documented in academic literature, for example here.

The point is that this topic made up most of my response to Wa7abi. If you want to ignore what I was saying and argue some other point, fair enough.
of its relation whether in chimps or humans to speciation
Wa7abi was sceptical that human chromosome 2 exists due to a fusion of two other chromosomes. I'm asking him (or you) how you would explain the fact that there are telomeres in the middle of human chromosome 2 without the occurence of such a fusion event.


End point it means if the theory is correct we came from a creature with 47 Chromosomes (Doubtful, since Chromosomes usually come in pairs and pairs are an even number what is being seen as a joined chromosome might not be a joined Chromosome ) in any case it is evidence we did not come from chimps as chimps have 48 not 47
I've highlighted the important part. For each type of chromosome you receive one from the mother and one from the father, so if you were to fuse/split any chromosome you actually lose/gain 2, not 1.

Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes. If you have 24 pairs and one pair joins with another you have 23, hence 48 individual chromosomes becomes 46.
 
The main thing is that the flies were not artificially selected for breeding to induce this change, they were not 'directly manipulated' for this result. Dobzhansky wasn't even aware of it until he collected another batch of flies, possibly years after the speciation event.
what did happen and how is it of relevance to the thread?
Perhaps you should elaborate, I haven't a clue what you mean by this.
If you want to try belittle my point by suggesting it's just some valueless waffle spread on the internet then you'll have to address the fact that it is well documented in academic literature, for example here.
Your article discusses such things as and let me quote directly:

'Huntington's disease gene, but also for genes associated with Wolf-Hirschhorn syndrome, polycystic kidney disease and a form of muscular dystrophy'


again, I am at a loss at what this has to do with evolution as pertains to speciation?

The point is that this topic made up most of my response to Wa7abi. If you want to ignore what I was saying and argue some other point, fair enough.
Wa7abi was sceptical that human chromosome 2 exists due to a fusion of two other chromosomes. I'm asking him (or you) how you would explain the fact that there are telomeres in the middle of human chromosome 2 without the occurence of such a fusion event.
And I have already stated that Wa7abi should defend such points, however, I have gone ahead and posted articles and videos as to what observably and naturally occurs as a direct result of fusion/breaks/translocations...

I've highlighted the important part. For each type of chromosome you receive one from the mother and one from the father, so if you were to fuse/split any chromosome you actually lose/gain 2, not 1.
That is not true at all, since there is no set pattern of chromosomal breaks and attachments.. and again, even if I were to accept it at face value, I have already posted a very detailed video to the outcome, most chromosomal anomalies are lethal in utero or result in very severe defects. Trisomy 21 is one of the few that can survive past the age of 20 and even they aren't without problems not just morphological but pathological as they are prune to Alzheimer and certain subtypes of Leukemia, again, pathologies not speciation!

Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes. If you have 24 pairs and one pair joins with another you have 23, hence 48 individual chromosomes becomes 46.
see above replies..
some humans are even a 45,XO (Turner's Syndrome) notice I used the term human.. not other specie into human!

all the best of course!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top