We only see noncoding DNA in living organisms, so that skews our view of how many "harmless" mutations occur. We never get to see the mutations that result in a failure to produce an observable offspring.
--Bill
William Caldecutt, Ph.D.
Polk Community College
Division of Liberal Arts and Sciences
Professor - Department of Biology
Faculty Senate President
"Office" --------LTB 2268 (second cubicle on right)
Phone-----------(863)669-2856 (on-campus 6800)
E-Mail ---------- wcaldecutt@xxxxxxxx
Snail Mail-------999 Ave. H NE
Winter Haven, FL 33881
Campus Mail-- Station 73
________________________________
From: HAPS-L-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Ken Saladin
Sent: Mon 2/19/2007 7:08 PM
To: HAPS-L@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [HAPS-L] Mutations
At 08:40 AM 2/19/2007, you wrote:
You're only considering mutations that happen in gametes and result in surviving offspring. What about all of the mutations that happen in gametes and cause death or malfunction of the gamete, or inviable offspring. What about all of the mutations in somatic cells?
--Bill
William Caldecutt, Ph.D.
I don't see why you think I'm considering only survivable and transmissible mutations. Can you clarify? I think my question includes both somatic and germline mutations, as well as the whole spectrum of lethal, sublethal, and harmless mutations.
Ken
The conventional wisdom is that most mutations are deleterious. But if 98%
of the DNA is noncoding (and with certain other assumptions that seem of
only peripheral relevance), wouldn't it be more accurate to say that a
considerable majority of mutations are harmless?
Just a bit of food for thought.
Ken
<<winmail.dat>>