More than 45,000 published journal articles indexed on PubMed already contained the term microRNA before evolutionary theorists declared the microRNAs were linked from their emergence to all biodiversity via mutations and evolution in: MicroRNA mechanisms of action: what have we learned from mice?
Conclusion:
We speculate that miRNAs emerged during evolution to increase the complexity of gene regulation, thereby contributing to the diversity of organisms.
See for comparison: ‘Natural cooperation’ is nutrient dependent and pheromone controlled
See also:
Evolution 2.0 is the Facebook group for the book of the same name. I’ve had limited success with attempts to discuss any aspect of RNA-mediated ecological adaptations on this blog or on my FB Group and welcome the opportunity to refer people to another source of accurate information, despite caveats about millions of years of evolution that I may address later.
For now, the caveats are too technical, and they merely echo the claims of Dobzhanky (1964). I’ve mentioned his claims about bird-watchers and butterfly collectors compared to serious scientists many times before, and they no longer matter in the context of information dissemination about biologically-based cause and effect.
The bottom line is that all serious scientists are Combating Evolution to Fight Disease by linking RNA-mediated cell type differentiation from atoms to ecosystems. Models that link atoms to ecosystems can be effectively compared to ridiculous neo-Darwinian theories.
See this parody for example. It starts with energy-dependent base pair changes that link atoms to ecosystems.
So does this model: Nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled ecological adaptations: from atoms to ecosystems. I refer to it as a model because it was an invited review of nutritional epigenetics, and the invitation was due to my prior publication of Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model, and a series of other published works that linked RNA-mediated cell type differentiation from species of microbes to humans via amino acid substitutions.
Others have continued to address the role that nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions play during the development of morphological and behavioral phenotypes, but experts in different disciplines cannot be expected to link physics and chemistry to the conserved molecular mechanisms of cell type differentiation in all living genera. The experts are forced to specialize, because their specialization makes them experts in different disciplines.
For example, Jennifer Doudna is an expert on the dual use technology of gene editing. Her expertise makes her afraid of the ignorance displayed by others.
See: When Is ‘Gene Editing’ Dangerous? (Video)
Excerpt:
“It is very important to consider the unintended genetic consequences of making an intended change, because there are all sorts of genetic interactions that occur in cells during cellular development — especially in humans, but also other organisms,” Doudna said.
My comment: No matter how many times an expert like Doudna advises caution, which she does because others do not know how RNA-mediated cell type differentiation is biophysically constrained, ideas about beneficial constraint-breaking mutations will continue to drive funding that probably will lead to drastic consequences linked to the dual use CRISPR-Cas technologies.
Most of the funding will come from the evolution industry until the entirety of government funding that also supports the big-bang cosmology industry links the pseudoscientific nonsense of emergence and neo-Darwinian theories about biodiversity to the death of us all.
Until then, let’s have some fun with the idea that the biologically uniformed can control what they claim is mutation-driven evolution. See this interview by Jon Stewart of Greg Bear.
Now, back to the world of serious scientists.
Privatization of cooperative benefits stabilizes mutualistic cross-feeding interactions in spatially structured environments
Reported as: Cooperating bacteria isolate cheaters
Bacteria, which reciprocally exchange amino acids, stabilize their partnership on two-dimensional surfaces and limit the access of non-cooperating bacteria to the exchanged nutrients.
Division of labor in the test tube: Bacteria grow faster if they feed each other
Bacteria connect to each other and exchange nutrients
Biologists discover bacteria communicate like neurons in the brain
Excerpt:
Just like the neurons in our brain, we found that bacteria use ion channels to communicate with each other through electrical signals,” said Süel. “In this way, the community of bacteria within biofilms appears to function much like a ‘microbial brain’.”
This comment invited a series of attacks for the next several days:
The obvious link from ecological variation and either nutrient stress or social stress to pathology is virus perturbed protein folding, which can be placed into the context of mutations and pathology but not into the context of RNA-mediated events that link nutrients and controlled social stress to healthy longevity in all living genera.
Within the next month, I was banned from participation on the Phys.org site. The claim was that I was posting PSEUDOSCIENCE
The fact that Cockroaches communicate via bacteria in their feces inspired this comment (but I have added back the hyperlinks):
Comments with hyperlinks to past works that Elizabeth Pennisi has published here are the most effective way to link what is currently known about ecological variation to ecological adaptations in the context of an atoms to ecosystems model that links nutrient-dependent microRNAs and cell adhesion proteins to the supercoiled DNA that protects organized genomes from virus-driven entropy in all living genera.
For example, see (without the hyperlinks)
Inching toward the 3D genome
The Man Who Bottled Evolution
All in the (bigger) family
Then see: “The global ocean microbiome” from this week’s issue of Science Magazine.
Wait for Ms. Pennisi or someone else to link viruses in the global ocean microbiome to all pathology and the nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled physiology of reproduction and RNA-mediated cell type differentiation in all invertebrates and vertebrates to healthy longevity via fixation of amino acid substitutions that stabilize organized genomes.
As you can see, I commented on Inching toward the 3D genome and on All in the (bigger) family, but not on The Man Who Bottled Evolution.
Claims that Richard Lenski “bottled evolution” are based on the pseudoscientific nonsense of neo-Darwinists who use de Vries 1904 definition of “mutation” and make assumptions about how long it would take one species to evolve into another via the accumulation of mutations.
The misrepresentations of biophysically constrained nutrient-dependent cause and effect in the context of the physiology of reproduction in species from microbes to man continue to plague all serious scientists who understand how RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry links thermodynamic cycles of protein biosynthesis and degradation from changes in the microRNA/messenger RNA balance to cell type differentiation in all living genera via obvious links from atoms to ecosystems. None of those links are placed into the context of neo-Darwinian theories, which started to become mainstream pseudoscience several decades ago.
Finally, what is known about The global ocean microbiome will change all that. All that is required for change is that the theorists accept the facts about what is known to serious scientists about RNA-mediated events. You can find those facts via the link I provided to a google search, or you can find them here. For less technical representations of the facts, you can read the book, Evolution 2.o, or nearly anything else published by someone who has not been taught to believe in neo-Darwinian nonsense.
For example, you could read a few science fiction novels by Greg Bear, whose prescient understanding of how RNA-mediated cell type differentiation is perturbed by viruses is unparalleled.
In “The Darwin Code: Intelligent Design without God”, he wrote.
What lies behind the transfer of bacterial genes? Again, environmental challenges and opportunities. While some gene exchange may be random, bacterial populations overall appear to practice functions similar to education, regimentation, and even the execution of uncooperative members. When forming bacterial colonies, many bacteria–often of different types–group together and exchange genes and chemical signals to produce an organized response to environmental change.
My comment: Remember what I wrote above about the report Cooperating bacteria isolate cheaters
Bacteria, which reciprocally exchange amino acids, stabilize their partnership on two-dimensional surfaces and limit the access of non-cooperating bacteria to the exchanged nutrients.
See also:
The RNA from his white blood cells was sequenced to determine his gene expression, which was then compared to his brain function.
The researchers found a strong correlation between brain activity and changes in the expression of many different families of genes. They also found that expression of genes related to inflammation and immune response matched Poldrack’s psoriasis flare-ups.
My comment: The researchers who claim to have found “a strong correlation between brain activity and changes in the expression of many different families of genes” failed to recognize that they found the link from atoms to ecosystems via microRNAs, cell adhesion proteins, and supercoiled DNA that links what is known about nutrient-dependent RNA-mediated cell type differentiation in species from microbes to humans via the conserved molecular epigenetics that we detailed in our 1996 review. From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior.
Also see: Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model and Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors
For comparison, see the latest ridiculous representation of how proteins automagically evolve. Principles of assembly reveal a periodic table of protein complexes