Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id IAA19428 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Thu, 21 Dec 2000 08:00:03 GMT Message-ID: <A4400389479FD3118C9400508B0FF2300411B8@DELTA.newhouse.akzonobel.nl> From: "Gatherer, D. (Derek)" <D.Gatherer@organon.nhe.akzonobel.nl> To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk> Subject: RE: Who knew genes could get mean? Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2000 08:55:14 +0100 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
Kenneth:
Culture influences a gene's expression in the way it interacts with the
environ-
ment_that is, IMO genes for specific characteristics are expressed
differently
over time, that is due IMO again, to differences on a memetical level.
Derek:
I think you're using 'expression' in a non-standard way. A gene's
expression is simply a description of how its protein-producing activity is
turned on and off. Cellular phenotypes, and ultimately organismal ones, are
of course ultimately dependent on expression of individual genes. It's like
a historian (who?) once said, history is the sum of billions of biographies.
Organisms could be argued to be the sum of several thousand patterns of gene
expression. So I'm not sure how to interpret what you say above. If by
'genes for specific characteristics are expressed differently
over time ... due .... to differences on a memetical level', you mean that
culture interferes with gene expression during the lifetime of an
individual, then of course that is true. Alcohol dehydrogenase, for
example, will be much less expressed in a teetotaller than in one who drinks
14 pints a night.
Kenneth:
Like I said, by the way I am not a biologist, I think the genepool is in
some
extend ' linked/ connected ' with the memepool ( or our parents, culture,
race,
gender- pool.) Genes ' take ' additional/ associated info with them along
the
DNA- sequence.
Derek:
But why do you think that? It doesn't follow from cultural influences on
gene expression. All those things happen within the lifetime of a single
individual. You seem to want some kind of (memetic?) information to cross
the germ-soma boundary. There's no way that _any_ information, memetic or
genetic (eg. a la Ted Steele), crosses that boundary, I can assure you. You
must stop thinking that, Kenneth. Really, you must.
Kenneth:
IMO, I do think that memetic factors have some activity on genes.
All can be described back on the environment, I think I can agree on that,
but somehow that influence has to be re- written in the gene.
Derek:
Why 'has to'? It has not. Genes have absolutely _nothing_ 'rewritten' in
them, at all at any time by any mechanism. They change by mutation,
duplication, deletion, and recombination (inversion and jumping included)
only. That's it. It really is. You must get this idea out of your head.
Sorry if I'm a little (or more than a little) overbearingly insistent about
this, that's just the teacher in me coming out - I can't bear to see anybody
labouring under a misapprehension.
===============================================================
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 2b29 : Thu Dec 21 2000 - 08:01:33 GMT