Latest Activity

Chris commented on Neal's photo
1 minute ago
doone replied to Adriana's discussion Science Bits, News, Videos in the group Science!
5 hours ago
doone gave a gift to Nathan Hevenstone
5 hours ago
Dallas the Phallus commented on Adriana's group Gender Blender
5 hours ago
Dallas the Phallus replied to Dallas the Phallus's discussion The New Words Thread: Things you ran across, remembered, or had to look up in the group A World of Words
5 hours ago
doone commented on Chris's group Right Wing Whackos
7 hours ago
doone commented on Radu Andreiu's group Mathematics
7 hours ago
doone commented on Dallas the Phallus's group THE NAKED APE
7 hours ago
doone commented on Julien's group The Music Box
8 hours ago
Carnun commented on Carnun's blog post Effective Altruism
9 hours ago
Onyango Makagutu replied to Claudia Mercedes Mazzucco's discussion How Would I Have Learned About Hell When I Could Not Conceive Heaven?
11 hours ago
Onyango Makagutu commented on Onyango Makagutu's blog post Is believing in god wrong?
11 hours ago
Chris commented on Onyango Makagutu's blog post Is believing in god wrong?
12 hours ago
National Atheist Party posted blog posts
14 hours ago
Marianne posted a status
"I checked another atheist site and I can say that AU is a thousand times better."
14 hours ago
Marianne replied to Chris's discussion Depressed people’s body clocks ‘out of sync’
14 hours ago

We are a worldwide social network of freethinkers, atheists, agnostics and secular humanists.

The lowly stickleback, a tiny spiny armored fish that has freshwater and saltwater populations, has revealed the path of fast adaptive evolution to different environment. the punch line: evolution acts on existing variation, and channels the same genomic regions over and over to achieve the same effect: adapting to a new environment, in this case, freshwater. Sticklebacks are being called "the finches of the fish world" because they provide a beautiful model to study vertebrate evolution. Sticklebacks were originally just saltwater inhabitants. When the last Ice Age ended some 10,000 years ago and glaciers retreated, sticklebacks invade the world’s rivers and lakes, adapting in a very short time (10,000 years is a very short time in evolutionary terms), to freshwater. Their salt tolerance, diets, kidney function, coloration, etc., changed. They shed their armor, because they faced faster but weaker predators than at sea. A population from an Alaskan lake changed from highly armored to weakly armored in just 13 generations! Scientists have now sequenced the entire genome of 21 different populations of saltwater and freshwater sticklebacks, and found that freshwater fish picked up basically the same genetic changes independently in different parts of the world, by tweaking the same genomic regions. Importantly, the researchers found that about 80% of freshwater adaptations happened by changing regulatory DNA, and not by effecting amino acid changes. This is crucial because regulatory changes would speed adaptation by controlling gene expression in multiple tissues, from only one or very few mutations.  The study also highlighted that stickleback evolution is accelerated by the use of pre-existing genetic variation, therefore there is no need for new, random mutations to arise. A little fish, a big headache for the creationists. 


Stickleback genomes reveal path of evolution


Fish have used pre-existing genetic variation to colonize fresh water many times.

04 April 2012

Freshwater sticklebacks such as this one have evolved from marine ancestors on many different occasions.

Scientists have pinpointed mutations that may help a tiny armoured fish to evolve quickly between saltwater and freshwater forms.

Since the last ice age ended about 10,000 years ago, ocean-dwelling threespine sticklebacks have repeatedly colonized streams and lakes worldwide. In as few as ten generations —  an evolutionary blink of an eye — marine sticklebacks can swap their armoured plates and defensive spines for a lighter, smoother freshwater form.

David Kingsley, an evolutionary biologist at Stanford University in California, and his colleagues have now identified the DNA differences that distinguish ocean and freshwater sticklebacks around the world. Even though the switch has occurred on multiple separate occasions, it seems to involve many of the same genetic changes each time.

To trace the key DNA differences, the researchers sequenced the entire genetic code of 21 sticklebacks from ocean and freshwater sources on three continents. The results are published in Nature today1.

The researchers found that, over most of the genomes, freshwater sticklebacks were most similar to their nearest ocean-dwelling neighbours. But in about 150 DNA sequences, freshwater and saltwater populations were each more like their counterparts in the same environments across the globe. These sequences included genes affecting armour growth and salt processing in the kidney.

“It’s a series of adaptations that affect many aspects of the organism: the shape of the fish, its behaviour, diet and mating preferences,” says evolutionary biologist Greg Wray at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, who was not involved in the study. 

The similarities between freshwater populations worldwide suggest that the fish do not evolve new features from scratch each time, says Kingsley. Rather, a few ocean-dwelling fish may retain ancient genetic adaptations to freshwater living that allow them to colonize new sites. The first few generations display mixed or intermediate features, but eventually the genes that allow the fish to adapt to fresh water dominate.

Read the rest here.

Tags: adaptation, evolution, fish, gene, genome

Views: 158

Replies to This Discussion

Stickleback genome reveals detail of evolution’s repeated experiment

Apathy, weary sighs, and fatigue: these are the symptoms of the psychological malaise that Carl Zimmer calls Yet Another Genome Syndrome. It is caused by the fast-flowing stream of publications, announcing the sequencing of another complete genome.

News reports about such publications tend to follow the same pattern. Scientists have deciphered the full genome of Animal X, which is known for Traits Y and Z, which could include commercial importance, social behaviour, being closely related to us, or just being exceptionally weird. By understanding X’s collection of As, Gs, Cs and Ts, we may gain insights into the genetic basis of Y and Z, which will be terribly important and there will be parties and cake.

Note the future tense. The value in sequencing yet another genome is almost never in the act itself, but in enabling an entire line of subsequent research. It’s the harbinger of news; it’s rarely news itself.

But there are exceptions. This week, there’s a paper about a new animal genome that goes the extra mile. It includes not just one full sequence, but twenty-one. It doesn’t just spell out the creature’s DNA, but also uses it to address some big questions in evolutionary biology. And its protagonist is a small, unassuming fish – the three-spined stickleback.

Sticklebacks are just a few inches long, and defend themselves with spines and plates of body armour running down their sides. But they fascinate scientists not for how they look, but what they did. Sticklebacks originally lived in the ocean, and many still do. When the last Ice Age ended some 10,000 years ago, retreating glaciers allowed the fish to repeatedly invade the world’s streams and lakes. In freshwater, they faced weaker but faster predators, so they lost their spines and armour and became smaller and more agile. Their lifestyles, colour, mating habits, salt tolerance and diets also changed.

Freshwater sticklebacks around the world have independently picked ..., often by tweaking the same genes, and often in just a few generations. This rich history has turned the three-spined stickleback into a supermodel of evolutionary biology. It gives us an unprecedented look at how species adapt to new environments, and whether they do so in predictable ways.

David Kingsley from Stanford University has been studying the stickleback for many years, and his team have now published the animal’s full genome. They first sequenced a single female from Bear Paw Lake in Alaska, going over each part of her DNA around 9 times. Most genome papers leave things there, but Kingsley’s group also sequenced 10 other pairs of sticklebacks from Asia, North America and Europe. Each pair included a freshwater fish, and a marine one from a connected population.

Read the rest here

Yes! the Stickleback would be a headache for the creationists! 

Because they went from a salt water environment to a fresh water environment in 10,000 years. The changes would not be evident just by looking at them. More so the salt processing in the kidneys which fresh water Sticklebacks would not require as much as their salt water relatives. 

They did it mostly by changing the regulatory DNA and not changing amino acids. 

Smart little fellers!

Just the number 10,000 associated with the word years is a major headache for Creationists.

One fish, two fish, red fish, stickleback

ResearchBlogging.org

Last week an interesting paper on evolution in sticklebacks, a widespread mostly marine fish, was published in Nature. Sticklebacks are fascinating because populations have repeatedly become established in freshwater at various times since the last ice age. Because of this they provide an amazing system in which the processes of adaptive evolution and speciation can be investigated in the wild.

The threespine stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus.
Evolution is often defined as the change in allele* frequencies with time. Observations of evolution in the wild, such as previous studies on sticklebacks, show that adaptation to novel environments can happen surprisingly quickly (just 13 generations in one documented case). Too rapidly, some argue, for adaptive alleles to have arisen after the novel environment is encountered. But, the adaptive alleles may already be present in the population at low frequency.


The left image shows the skeletal differences between marine and freshwater sticklebacks. On the right are preserved specimens stained red. Note the strong divergence in morphology between the marine and freshwater forms, which can arise in just 13 generations (all images David Kingsley).
If sticklebacks adapted to freshwater through the selection of alleles that arose after they encountered the new environment, then alleles within freshwater populations should be most genetically similar to the populations they diverged form. Conversely, if adaptation occurred through selection on already existing alleles, then freshwater populations should share similar alleles with each other. And the authors tested which of these possibilities was operating in sticklebacks by sequencing the entire genome of ten pairs of sticklebacks. Each pair came from the same area, but one member was the marine form while the other was the freshwater form.

Read the rest here.

RSS

© 2013   Created by Atheist Universe.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Service