From: Chris Taylor (chris.taylor@ebi.ac.uk)
Date: Fri 09 Dec 2005 - 10:28:59 GMT
Do we have any indication at all that this is the _same_
mutation? On a quick skim I couldn't see anything beyond
phenotypic descriptions..? Also what is the likelihood of
getting this phenotypic (genotypic?) response through some more
indirect form of stress (i.e. is this resistance a side effect
of something this strain was on the verge of doing anyway)? IT
appears that the cell line that gave any results at all was a
strange sort of beastie; perhaps this would have occurred
anyway? And lastly, tell me we're not looking at statistical
samples of one here?
I also would strongly contest, as before, that this sweeping
mechanism is particularly advantageous. When plants signal
caterpillar attack to each other through mycorrhiza, it is a
very specific signal, which elicits a very specific response.
The joy of (~)distinct patches is that they allow subpopulations
to wander away from a local maximum to find new maxima (through
reduced Ne [effective pop. size]) with the 'insurance' that
should that subpop get wiped out, other subpops will carry on.
Best of both worlds (small Ne / big Ne).
Cheers, Chris.
Derek Gatherer wrote:
>> The last paragraph of the last message should actually be:
>
>
> To say that "the more one selects for resistance the more mutants one
> finds" (p.214 top) is meaningless, for the above reason, unless one can
> show that in cells never exposed to the _selection pressure_, there are
> fewer resistant colonies. Since Hill maintains that in cells never
> exposed to the _selection pressure_, there are actually _more_ resistant
> colonies, this experiment is by definition control-less.
>
> Selection pressure, not mutagen (there is no mutagen in this experiment,
> apart from the mutagenic effect probably visible in the serial assay)
>
>> To say that "the more one selects for resistance the more mutants one
>> finds" (p.214 top) is meaningless, for the above reason, unless one
>> can show that in cells never exposed to the mutagen, there are fewer
>> resistant colonies. Since Hill maintains that in cells never exposed
>> to the mutagen, there are actually _more_ resistant colonies, this
>> experiment is by definition control-less.
>>
>> ===============================================================
>> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
>> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
>> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
>> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>>
>
>
> ===============================================================
> This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
> Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
> For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
> see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
>
>
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ chris.taylor@ebi.ac.uk http://psidev.sf.net/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ =============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri 09 Dec 2005 - 10:47:16 GMT