Does Evolution = Mutation?

Question

some people when they try to explain what evolution is they talk about it as mutation.

but i have heard that there is no good form (or benefits) of mutation because mutation is always harmful and i saw an interview with Richard Dawkins where he was asked to give 1 mutation which wasn't harmful and he couldn't.

so any explanations and thanks

Answer 1

Mutation is what happens naturally, to create diversity within species, and eventually bifurcation of species. Without mutation everything would stay the same, and we would still be whatever single-cell organisms life started as.



Evolution is the process whereby those individuals that have the best chances of successfully reproducing get to pass on their genes to the next generation, which automatically selects the 'beneficial' mutations to be incorporated into the feature set, and the 'less beneficial' ones to be ruled out.



And I'm pretty sure Prof Dawkins would have had no trouble listing beneficial mutations, given that there are countless examples to choose from. Take opposable thumbs - they started out as a series of mutations, and if you've ever held a pencil you'll know that they're pretty useful.

Answer 2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment



The Lenski experiment shows evolution in action. E. coli was grown on plates where nutrients were extremely limited, but citrate - which E. coli can't normally use - was in abundance. Over about 20 years, the bacteria evolved the ability to use citrate. Genetic analysis has shown the specific mutations that allowed this to happen, as well as confirmed that it is, indeed, E. coli and not some outside contaminant.



If that is NOT Evolution, what is it? The E. coli did not start with a gene to metabolize citrate, and it took 2 gene mutation to allow then to prosper.



Our Resident Creationist will no doubt point out that E coli can metabolize citrate UNDER VERY SPECIAL CONDITIONS (Read the web site cited). Lenski has E coli that can metabolize citrate under all conditions and that took 2 mutations. And only 1 or 2 of his cultures can do that. Citrate metabolism is NOT a normal E coli function. His other cultures may NEVER be able to do that.

Answer 3

Evolution happens because of tiny mutations.

Some mutations are beneficial. For example, early giraffes had short necks compared to now. But some of these giraffes carried a tiny mutation which meant they had longer necks. The giraffes with longer necks could reach food more easily, therefore were more likely to survive and reproduce, passing the mutation on. Eventually, all giraffes had long necks because the ones with short necks died. See?

Evolution is a process that relies on random mutation. Some mutations are bad and therefore unlikely to be passed on as the creature with the mutation dies because of it. Some mutations are either beneficial or have no effect, so are often passed on. Many hair and eye colours are mutations, but they don't have any impact on survival, so it doesn't matter.



I hope that helped :)

Answer 4

Most mutations have no effect, of those that do have an effect most are harmful, rarely a mutation will occur that is beneficial. but being that natural selection 'acts' like a filter harmful mutations don't last vary long in a population, while beneficial mutations do.



The dawkins interview was more about him being annoyed at the people lying to him about the interview than him not being able to find an example. and science isn't done by snappy memorized answers, it's done by methodical research.

Answer 5

That's simply incorrect. Here's just one scientific paper to the contrary:



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17690297



Evolution is more than mutation, though. It's a result of inheritance, variation, and selection. Mutation is just one source of variation, and even then, variation is only one half of the natural selection equation... and natural selection is just one type of evolution.



Here's a good explanation of how it works:



http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_14



Also, the bit about Dawkins is incorrect. He was actually asked about mutations that increase genetic information. The interview was being conducted by creationists - he paused to formulate his answer, but they edited it out, to make it look like he was stumped. Even if he WAS stumped, it would be irrelevant. His background is in evolutionary biology, but he's not the be-all and end-all of the field. Science is built up on a consensus of experts, not lone individuals.



Finally, CRR is (as usual) lying about evolution. Mutations that add information have been pointed out to him time and time again. I've also explained to him how beneficial mutations aren't that rare... at which point, he implied that he wished that my infant daughter would get cancer. When I got angry, he flipped it around to play word games and make it seem like I didn't believe what I had been saying about mutations. So yeah. He's lying about science in order to further an ostensibly Christian ideology, but can't even follow the ideology he's pushing.

Answer 6

If the mutation could benefit the organism to the point where it could help the organism survive, then the mutation is good for the organism. For example, during one of the ice ages there were only black bears and a mutation occurred in a Bear's DNA which caused her to have a white cub. The cub was able to blend into the snow better than the brown bear cubs and therefore had a better chance of survival. Since the white bear had a better chance of survival than the brown bear, it lived to reproduce and pas on it's traits to it's offspring. Over time, the white bears became more prominent and likely to survive, so they kept on reproducing and reproducing to the point where the brown bears died out because of competition for food. The white bears are known as polar bears today and they became a whole seprate species than the brown bears (hence Darwin's theory on how new species arise).

Answer 7

Well, mutation is the ultimate source of genetic diversity. All other mechanisms of evolution (natural selection, genetic drift, gene flow) are sorting EXISTING variants of genes. But they all contribute to evolution; it is not just mutation doing all the work.



You can think of antibiotic resistance in bacteria as a beneficial mutation... well, it's only beneficial for the bacteria, not for us.



Having two copies of a mutated allele for the hemoglobin gene can cause sickle cell anemia; having only one mutated allele confers resistance to malaria.



Being able to digest lactose past infancy can be attributed to a beneficial mutation in the gene for lactase production.



A deletion of a membrane receptor protein gene prevents HIV from infecting T cells.



There are beneficial mutations out there, even if Richard Dawkins can't think of them on the spot in an interview.

Answer 8

I suggest you find out how many mutations you have that your parents don't have. You will be surprised. You have **dozens**. And I don't think you are dead.





http://www.livescience.com/33347-mutants-average-human-60-genetic-mutations.html

http://sandwalk.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/estimating-human-human-mutatin-rate.html



Here are scientific papers that show mutations have contributed to new genes with obvious beneficial results



http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/origins-of-new-genes-and-pseudogenes-835





Evolution of Duplicate Gene Expression in Polyploid and Hybrid Plants

http://jhered.oxfordjournals.org/content/98/2/136.full.pdf+html



Further examples of evolution by gene duplication revealed through DNA sequence comparisons

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7896112



Evolution of Mhc class II B genes in Darwin's finches and their closest relatives: birth of a new gene

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11862412



The birth of new genes by RNA- and DNA-mediated duplication during mammalian evolution

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19803737



De Novo Origin of Human Protein-Coding Genes

http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pgen.1002379



Identification and dynamics of a beneficial mutation in a long-term evolution experiment with Escherichia coli

http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2148-9-302.pdf



On the Formation of Novel Genes by Duplication in the Caenorhabditis elegans Genome

http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/23/5/1056



@CRR and his edit. I see the first cracks in your Creationist dogma "rock".... so you can't stand the heat but want to stay in the kitchen? Blocking me won't stop me pointing out your past statements that show a pattern of deception, deceit, and now looking at Andy's post despicable behavior. You do know how to read.... all the papers above falsify your absurd view that speciation reduces genetic diversity. That would mean the first life 3.5 billion years ago had an infinite genome to produce the biodiversity we see today. Talk about illogical thinking and lack of comprehension. And as usual no credible references or knowledge. You have no credibility on this board.

Answer 9

No. Despite X-Men series being pure class its scientifically inaccurate. People who evolve would do so generally at the same pace. So no, mutations would be a complete different thing altogether.

Answer 10

genes for antibiotic resistance is a result of mutation. the beta-lactamase enzyme gene and transpeptidase enzyme gene originate from an ancestral gene which undergoes mutation to form each gene. It gets transfered (horizontal gene transfer) to various other bacteria that do not originally have the beta-lactamase gene. After antibiotic was introduced, mutation of beta-lactamase gene causes the bacteria to be more resistant to antibiotic

https://www.quora.com/How-did-certain-bacteria-become-resistant-to-certain-antibiotics/answer/Stuart-Rawson

Answer 11

There are no beneficial information adding mutations; or at least very few.

There are information losing mutations that have some benefit.

Sickle cell trait is a degradation of red blood cells that is harmful but does provide limited benefit in resisting malaria.

Adult lactase production is loss of the normal regulation of lactase production that all mammals have.

HIV resistance is similarly due to loss of a critical receptor on the cell.



However you will never evolve from microbes to man by losing genetic information, no matter how beneficial they are..



[edit] Lenski's citrate eating E. coli. Yes, Old Pilot, they did start with the ability to metabolise citrate. Normally this is switched off in oxic environments because it is inefficient. (i.e. the "very special" conditions are a lack of oxygen.) Some bacteria in this experiment had a mutation where the relevant genes were copied to an an area where they were no longer under regulatory control and hence were left switched on. In the artificial laboratory environment this was beneficial. In normal environments these bacteria are less fit than others.



This experiment has shown a great tendency for bacteria to lose genetic information, not gain it.



Over thousands of generations the original E. coli have evolved into ....

... E. coli.



[edit] @Ted K. No these were not information adding mutations. It just moved an existing gene from one place to another in the genome.



FTR. I blocked DrJ for comment diarrhea, most of which was irrelevant or ad hominem attacks. Old Pilot could be next. I don't block people just because they disagree with me.

Answer 12

it's not necessarily harmful