| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
07 Jul 2004 07:33:10 AM |
| Object: |
Natural Selection |
Genetics Research Could Help Disarm Deadly Viruses
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/505911/
There may be a potential for random mutations to accumulate in the
genetic material of viruses to the point that so many mistakes in the
DNA or RNA may keep a deadly virus from reproducing or maintaining
itself.
Newswise - Taken to its ultimate outcome, the research that biology
professor Dr. Steve Howard is working on could help disarm deadly
retroviruses such as HIV or SARS.
Howard, associate professor of biology at Middle Tennessee State
University, would be the first to advise against making that kind of
quantum-leap claim. It's much too early. But assuming that the
research that led to the polio vaccine first crawled, then walked,
then charted a new course for civilization itself, Howard's discovery
is more than significant.
Natural Selection
http://news.google.com/news?q=%20%22Natural%20selection%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=gn
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Natural+selection%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&tab=nw&sa=N
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Natural+selection%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&output=search&cat=gwd/Top
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22Natural%20selection%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=dg
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_epq=Natural%20selection&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&as_scoring=d&lr=&num=100&hl=en
.
|
|
| User: "Klaus Hellnick" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 12:43:24 PM |
|
|
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0407070437.58eac2f8@posting.google.com...
Genetics Research Could Help Disarm Deadly Viruses
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/505911/
There may be a potential for random mutations to accumulate in the
genetic material of viruses to the point that so many mistakes in the
DNA or RNA may keep a deadly virus from reproducing or maintaining
itself.
WHAT??????
This makes no sense at all. Obiously, natural selection would keep such
maladapted virii from spreading, while the ones not debilitated would go on
their merry way. I would like to know exactly what the mechanism is, that
would cause these very bad mutations to spread in the virus population.
Klaus
Newswise - Taken to its ultimate outcome, the research that biology
professor Dr. Steve Howard is working on could help disarm deadly
retroviruses such as HIV or SARS.
Howard, associate professor of biology at Middle Tennessee State
University, would be the first to advise against making that kind of
quantum-leap claim. It's much too early. But assuming that the
research that led to the polio vaccine first crawled, then walked,
then charted a new course for civilization itself, Howard's discovery
is more than significant.
Natural Selection
http://news.google.com/news?q=%20%22Natural%20selection%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=gn
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Natural+selection%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&tab=nw&sa=N
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Natural+selection%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&output=search&cat=gwd/Top
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%22Natural%20selection%22&num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=dg
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_epq=Natural%20selection&safe=images&ie=UTF-8&as_scoring=d&lr=&num=100&hl=en
.
|
|
|
| User: "r norman" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 01:25:55 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 17:43:24 +0000 (UTC), "Klaus Hellnick"
<khellnicknospam@houston.rr.com> wrote:
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0407070437.58eac2f8@posting.google.com...
Genetics Research Could Help Disarm Deadly Viruses
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/505911/
There may be a potential for random mutations to accumulate in the
genetic material of viruses to the point that so many mistakes in the
DNA or RNA may keep a deadly virus from reproducing or maintaining
itself.
WHAT??????
This makes no sense at all. Obiously, natural selection would keep such
maladapted virii from spreading, while the ones not debilitated would go on
their merry way. I would like to know exactly what the mechanism is, that
would cause these very bad mutations to spread in the virus population.
Klaus
The original citation is from a news release by Middle Tennessee State
University and cites the work of one of its faculty, Dr. Steve Howard.
It says the work was published "recently" in Physical Review Letters
with JF Fontanari and A Colato as coauthors.
Physical Review Letters does not have a new paper by Howard, but does
list "Mutation Accumulation in Growing Asexual Lineages" by Fontanari
(first author) Colato, and Howard (Phys Rev Lett 91, 218101 (2003).
This paper discusses mutations and Muller's ratchet, but seem not to
have anything to do with retroviruses or the other material in the
news release. Strangely, Howard's own web site
http://www.mtsu.edu/~rshoward/
doesn't seem to discuss the material in the news release.
Very strange. It shows you really shouldn't rely on news releases (or
the newspaper/magazine blurbs that result) for good information.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 05:07:02 PM |
|
|
"r norman" <rsn_@_comcast.net> wrote in message
news:bnfoe0h6sv8lbl8m13vjdiagjd8b87vho1@4ax.com...
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 17:43:24 +0000 (UTC), "Klaus Hellnick"
<khellnicknospam@houston.rr.com> wrote:
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0407070437.58eac2f8@posting.google.com...
Genetics Research Could Help Disarm Deadly Viruses
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/505911/
There may be a potential for random mutations to accumulate in the
genetic material of viruses to the point that so many mistakes in
the
DNA or RNA may keep a deadly virus from reproducing or maintaining
itself.
WHAT??????
This makes no sense at all. Obiously, natural selection would keep
such
maladapted virii from spreading, while the ones not debilitated would
go on
their merry way. I would like to know exactly what the mechanism is,
that
would cause these very bad mutations to spread in the virus
population.
Klaus
The original citation is from a news release by Middle Tennessee State
University and cites the work of one of its faculty, Dr. Steve Howard.
It says the work was published "recently" in Physical Review Letters
with JF Fontanari and A Colato as coauthors.
Physical Review Letters does not have a new paper by Howard,
Not "new", but *recent*.
but does
list "Mutation Accumulation in Growing Asexual Lineages" by Fontanari
(first author) Colato, and Howard (Phys Rev Lett 91, 218101 (2003).
This paper discusses mutations and Muller's ratchet, but seem not to
have anything to do with retroviruses or the other material in the
news release.
Really?
Strangely, Howard's own web site
http://www.mtsu.edu/~rshoward/
doesn't seem to discuss the material in the news release.
What is strange about that? He does list the article, as one of eight.
Should he discuss them all?
Very strange. It shows you really shouldn't rely on news releases (or
the newspaper/magazine blurbs that result) for good information.
Actually you shouldn't trust *anything* for good information.
.
|
|
|
| User: "r norman" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 05:41:55 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 22:07:02 +0000 (UTC), "Glenn"
<glennsheldon@SPAMqwest.net> wrote:
"r norman" <rsn_@_comcast.net> wrote in message
news:bnfoe0h6sv8lbl8m13vjdiagjd8b87vho1@4ax.com...
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 17:43:24 +0000 (UTC), "Klaus Hellnick"
<khellnicknospam@houston.rr.com> wrote:
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0407070437.58eac2f8@posting.google.com...
Genetics Research Could Help Disarm Deadly Viruses
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/505911/
There may be a potential for random mutations to accumulate in the
genetic material of viruses to the point that so many mistakes in
the
DNA or RNA may keep a deadly virus from reproducing or maintaining
itself.
WHAT??????
This makes no sense at all. Obiously, natural selection would keep
such
maladapted virii from spreading, while the ones not debilitated would
go on
their merry way. I would like to know exactly what the mechanism is,
that
would cause these very bad mutations to spread in the virus
population.
Klaus
The original citation is from a news release by Middle Tennessee State
University and cites the work of one of its faculty, Dr. Steve Howard.
It says the work was published "recently" in Physical Review Letters
with JF Fontanari and A Colato as coauthors.
Physical Review Letters does not have a new paper by Howard,
Not "new", but *recent*.
but does
list "Mutation Accumulation in Growing Asexual Lineages" by Fontanari
(first author) Colato, and Howard (Phys Rev Lett 91, 218101 (2003).
This paper discusses mutations and Muller's ratchet, but seem not to
have anything to do with retroviruses or the other material in the
news release.
Really?
Strangely, Howard's own web site
http://www.mtsu.edu/~rshoward/
doesn't seem to discuss the material in the news release.
What is strange about that? He does list the article, as one of eight.
Should he discuss them all?
Very strange. It shows you really shouldn't rely on news releases (or
the newspaper/magazine blurbs that result) for good information.
Actually you shouldn't trust *anything* for good information.
1) You are right about "new" vs. recent.
2) The news release focused on concepts that are not referred to at
least in the abstract of the publication. These include the
"keywords: Disarming deadly retroviruses" or the "llock-and-key
mechanism in determining the genetic basis to infections". I looked
for something "newer" than "recent" specifically to find something
dealing with those ideas.
3) Howards' web site also does not deal with the ideas I just listed.
He does cite the Phys Rev Lett publication and talks a little about
that, but not at all about the material in the press release.
4) All human-generated information is flawed one way or another. Your
posts, Glenn, seem rather heavily lacking in "good" information. Much
published information, including some papers on evolution published in
refereed journals are flawed. (My posts, of course, are the rare
exception). We do the best we can. And then we can count on you to
carp about the details and point out the flaws, real or imagined,
without doing anything to improve the situation.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 06:34:38 PM |
|
|
"r norman" <rsn_@_comcast.net> wrote in message
news:ukuoe015lhsa6vjk45a47qlfrm7tm20bqt@4ax.com...
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 22:07:02 +0000 (UTC), "Glenn"
<glennsheldon@SPAMqwest.net> wrote:
"r norman" <rsn_@_comcast.net> wrote in message
news:bnfoe0h6sv8lbl8m13vjdiagjd8b87vho1@4ax.com...
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 17:43:24 +0000 (UTC), "Klaus Hellnick"
<khellnicknospam@houston.rr.com> wrote:
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0407070437.58eac2f8@posting.google.com...
Genetics Research Could Help Disarm Deadly Viruses
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/505911/
There may be a potential for random mutations to accumulate in
the
genetic material of viruses to the point that so many mistakes
in
the
DNA or RNA may keep a deadly virus from reproducing or
maintaining
itself.
WHAT??????
This makes no sense at all. Obiously, natural selection would keep
such
maladapted virii from spreading, while the ones not debilitated
would
go on
their merry way. I would like to know exactly what the mechanism
is,
that
would cause these very bad mutations to spread in the virus
population.
Klaus
The original citation is from a news release by Middle Tennessee
State
University and cites the work of one of its faculty, Dr. Steve
Howard.
It says the work was published "recently" in Physical Review
Letters
with JF Fontanari and A Colato as coauthors.
Physical Review Letters does not have a new paper by Howard,
Not "new", but *recent*.
but does
list "Mutation Accumulation in Growing Asexual Lineages" by
Fontanari
(first author) Colato, and Howard (Phys Rev Lett 91, 218101 (2003).
This paper discusses mutations and Muller's ratchet, but seem not
to
have anything to do with retroviruses or the other material in the
news release.
Really?
Strangely, Howard's own web site
http://www.mtsu.edu/~rshoward/
doesn't seem to discuss the material in the news release.
What is strange about that? He does list the article, as one of
eight.
Should he discuss them all?
Very strange. It shows you really shouldn't rely on news releases
(or
the newspaper/magazine blurbs that result) for good information.
Actually you shouldn't trust *anything* for good information.
1) You are right about "new" vs. recent.
2) The news release focused on concepts that are not referred to at
least in the abstract of the publication. These include the
"keywords: Disarming deadly retroviruses" or the "llock-and-key
mechanism in determining the genetic basis to infections". I looked
for something "newer" than "recent" specifically to find something
dealing with those ideas.
3) Howards' web site also does not deal with the ideas I just listed.
He does cite the Phys Rev Lett publication and talks a little about
that, but not at all about the material in the press release.
4) All human-generated information is flawed one way or another. Your
posts, Glenn, seem rather heavily lacking in "good" information. Much
published information, including some papers on evolution published in
refereed journals are flawed. (My posts, of course, are the rare
exception). We do the best we can. And then we can count on you to
carp about the details and point out the flaws, real or imagined,
without doing anything to improve the situation.
Well, "doing the best we can" _is_ the issue, now isn't it. You make
some inflammatory remarks about my posts, but a review of this one seems
to reveal that I did somehwhat better than you did, with nothing but
your own information.
.
|
|
|
| User: "r norman" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 09:16:26 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 23:34:38 +0000 (UTC), "Glenn"
<glennsheldon@SPAMqwest.net> wrote:
You make
some inflammatory remarks about my posts, but a review of this one seems
to reveal that I did somehwhat better than you did, with nothing but
your own information.
A couple of aspirin will help with that inflammation.
Perhaps if you ever contributed some information of your own, you
would do even better!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Glenn" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 09:36:16 PM |
|
|
"r norman" <rsn_@_comcast.net> wrote in message
news:0lbpe0dj7nbb6ecc32k6noctdpg7sloe88@4ax.com...
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 23:34:38 +0000 (UTC), "Glenn"
<glennsheldon@SPAMqwest.net> wrote:
You make
some inflammatory remarks about my posts, but a review of this one
seems
to reveal that I did somehwhat better than you did, with nothing but
your own information.
A couple of aspirin will help with that inflammation.
Perhaps if you ever contributed some information of your own, you
would do even better!
Oh, I can easily prove that I do contribute information. You do know
what that means, don't you.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Harshman" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 04:08:49 PM |
|
|
r norman wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 17:43:24 +0000 (UTC), "Klaus Hellnick"
<khellnicknospam@houston.rr.com> wrote:
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0407070437.58eac2f8@posting.google.com...
Genetics Research Could Help Disarm Deadly Viruses
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/505911/
There may be a potential for random mutations to accumulate in the
genetic material of viruses to the point that so many mistakes in the
DNA or RNA may keep a deadly virus from reproducing or maintaining
itself.
WHAT??????
This makes no sense at all. Obiously, natural selection would keep such
maladapted virii from spreading, while the ones not debilitated would go on
their merry way. I would like to know exactly what the mechanism is, that
would cause these very bad mutations to spread in the virus population.
Klaus
The original citation is from a news release by Middle Tennessee State
University and cites the work of one of its faculty, Dr. Steve Howard.
It says the work was published "recently" in Physical Review Letters
with JF Fontanari and A Colato as coauthors.
Physical Review Letters does not have a new paper by Howard, but does
list "Mutation Accumulation in Growing Asexual Lineages" by Fontanari
(first author) Colato, and Howard (Phys Rev Lett 91, 218101 (2003).
This paper discusses mutations and Muller's ratchet, but seem not to
have anything to do with retroviruses or the other material in the
news release. Strangely, Howard's own web site
http://www.mtsu.edu/~rshoward/
doesn't seem to discuss the material in the news release.
Very strange. It shows you really shouldn't rely on news releases (or
the newspaper/magazine blurbs that result) for good information.
I wonder two more things:
1. Is this any more than a restatement of Mullers ratchet, and if not
how could anyone conceive that there is any possibility of a treatment
lurking there?
and
2. Why was this published in a physics journal?
Press releases are certainly a bizarre sort of animal.
.
|
|
|
| User: "r norman" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
08 Jul 2004 08:24:10 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 21:08:49 +0000 (UTC), John Harshman
<jharshman.diespamdie@pacbell.net> wrote:
<snip a lot of history>
<here is the original issue>
Genetics Research Could Help Disarm Deadly Viruses
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/505911/
There may be a potential for random mutations to accumulate in the
genetic material of viruses to the point that so many mistakes in the
DNA or RNA may keep a deadly virus from reproducing or maintaining
itself.
<here is a simple query about content by John Harshman>
1. Is this any more than a restatement of Mullers ratchet, and if not
how could anyone conceive that there is any possibility of a treatment
lurking there?
I now have the complete text of the paper referred to in the news
release. It is indeed nothing more than Muller's ratchet. The paper
itself merely calculates the probability of extinction under some new
conditions. The only mention of implications and applications is a
reference to other publications. One of these is, indeed, about
retroviruses:
Eloisa Yuste, Sonsoles Sánchez-Palomino,, Concha Casado,
Esteban Domingo, and Cecilio López-Galíndez
Drastic Fitness Loss in Human Immunodeficiency Virus Type 1
upon Serial Bottleneck Events
Journal of Virology, April 1999, p. 2745-2751, Vol. 73, No. 4
http://jvi.asm.org/cgi/content/full/73/4/2745?view=full&pmid=10074121
Here is the abstract of that paper and the sole source for the ideas
in the quote above about applications to retroviruses
Muller's ratchet predicts fitness losses in small populations of
asexual organisms because of the irreversible accumulation of
deleterious mutations and genetic drift. This effect should be
enhanced if population bottlenecks intervene and fixation of mutations
is not compensated by recombination. To study whether Muller's ratchet
could operate in a retrovirus, 10 biological clones were derived from
a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) field isolate by MT-4
plaque assay. Each clone was subjected to 15 plaque-to-plaque
passages. Surprisingly, genetic deterioration of viral clones was very
drastic, and only 4 of the 10 initial clones were able to produce
viable progeny after the serial plaque transfers. Two of the initial
clones stopped forming plaques at passage 7, two others stopped at
passage 13, and only four of the remaining six clones yielded
infectious virus. Of these four, three displayed important fitness
losses. Thus, despite virions carrying two copies of genomic RNA and
the system displaying frequent recombination, HIV-1 manifested a
drastic fitness loss as a result of an accentuation of Muller's
ratchet effect.
I would imagine this topic is now pretty well exhausted, unless anyone
wants to discuss the more general question of Muller's ratchet.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "r norman" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 05:30:59 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 21:08:49 +0000 (UTC), John Harshman
<jharshman.diespamdie@pacbell.net> wrote:
r norman wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 17:43:24 +0000 (UTC), "Klaus Hellnick"
<khellnicknospam@houston.rr.com> wrote:
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0407070437.58eac2f8@posting.google.com...
Genetics Research Could Help Disarm Deadly Viruses
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/505911/
There may be a potential for random mutations to accumulate in the
genetic material of viruses to the point that so many mistakes in the
DNA or RNA may keep a deadly virus from reproducing or maintaining
itself.
WHAT??????
This makes no sense at all. Obiously, natural selection would keep such
maladapted virii from spreading, while the ones not debilitated would go on
their merry way. I would like to know exactly what the mechanism is, that
would cause these very bad mutations to spread in the virus population.
Klaus
The original citation is from a news release by Middle Tennessee State
University and cites the work of one of its faculty, Dr. Steve Howard.
It says the work was published "recently" in Physical Review Letters
with JF Fontanari and A Colato as coauthors.
Physical Review Letters does not have a new paper by Howard, but does
list "Mutation Accumulation in Growing Asexual Lineages" by Fontanari
(first author) Colato, and Howard (Phys Rev Lett 91, 218101 (2003).
This paper discusses mutations and Muller's ratchet, but seem not to
have anything to do with retroviruses or the other material in the
news release. Strangely, Howard's own web site
http://www.mtsu.edu/~rshoward/
doesn't seem to discuss the material in the news release.
Very strange. It shows you really shouldn't rely on news releases (or
the newspaper/magazine blurbs that result) for good information.
I wonder two more things:
1. Is this any more than a restatement of Mullers ratchet, and if not
how could anyone conceive that there is any possibility of a treatment
lurking there?
and
2. Why was this published in a physics journal?
Press releases are certainly a bizarre sort of animal.
I don't have free access to Phys Rev Lett so I can't check on it
easily (without actually walking all the way to the library!).
It is probably in a Physics journal because the first two authors are
physicists. There is some more mathematically oriented stuff there,
sometimes excellent quality and sometimes physicists playing at
biology with a lot of math but little significance.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Harshman" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 05:50:36 PM |
|
|
r norman wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 21:08:49 +0000 (UTC), John Harshman
<jharshman.diespamdie@pacbell.net> wrote:
r norman wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 17:43:24 +0000 (UTC), "Klaus Hellnick"
<khellnicknospam@houston.rr.com> wrote:
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0407070437.58eac2f8@posting.google.com...
Genetics Research Could Help Disarm Deadly Viruses
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/505911/
There may be a potential for random mutations to accumulate in the
genetic material of viruses to the point that so many mistakes in the
DNA or RNA may keep a deadly virus from reproducing or maintaining
itself.
WHAT??????
This makes no sense at all. Obiously, natural selection would keep such
maladapted virii from spreading, while the ones not debilitated would go on
their merry way. I would like to know exactly what the mechanism is, that
would cause these very bad mutations to spread in the virus population.
Klaus
The original citation is from a news release by Middle Tennessee State
University and cites the work of one of its faculty, Dr. Steve Howard.
It says the work was published "recently" in Physical Review Letters
with JF Fontanari and A Colato as coauthors.
Physical Review Letters does not have a new paper by Howard, but does
list "Mutation Accumulation in Growing Asexual Lineages" by Fontanari
(first author) Colato, and Howard (Phys Rev Lett 91, 218101 (2003).
This paper discusses mutations and Muller's ratchet, but seem not to
have anything to do with retroviruses or the other material in the
news release. Strangely, Howard's own web site
http://www.mtsu.edu/~rshoward/
doesn't seem to discuss the material in the news release.
Very strange. It shows you really shouldn't rely on news releases (or
the newspaper/magazine blurbs that result) for good information.
I wonder two more things:
1. Is this any more than a restatement of Mullers ratchet, and if not
how could anyone conceive that there is any possibility of a treatment
lurking there?
and
2. Why was this published in a physics journal?
Press releases are certainly a bizarre sort of animal.
I don't have free access to Phys Rev Lett so I can't check on it
easily (without actually walking all the way to the library!).
It is probably in a Physics journal because the first two authors are
physicists.
See, I always thought that journals were organized by subject matter,
not by the professions of the authors. If I had a couple of thoughts on
the three body problem, I would not submit them to Genetics, even though
I'm a biologist. Perhaps they had some kind of in with the editors. But
how would this get past a reviewer? And how is a physicist qualified to
review a biology paper anyway?
There is some more mathematically oriented stuff there,
sometimes excellent quality and sometimes physicists playing at
biology with a lot of math but little significance.
One is reminded of Fred Hoyle reinventing population genetics.
.
|
|
|
| User: "r norman" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 09:32:39 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 22:50:36 +0000 (UTC), John Harshman
<jharshman.diespamdie@pacbell.net> wrote:
r norman wrote:
<snip history>
It is probably in a Physics journal because the first two authors are
physicists.
See, I always thought that journals were organized by subject matter,
not by the professions of the authors. If I had a couple of thoughts on
the three body problem, I would not submit them to Genetics, even though
I'm a biologist. Perhaps they had some kind of in with the editors. But
how would this get past a reviewer? And how is a physicist qualified to
review a biology paper anyway?
There is some more mathematically oriented stuff there,
sometimes excellent quality and sometimes physicists playing at
biology with a lot of math but little significance.
One is reminded of Fred Hoyle reinventing population genetics.
Physical Review Letters is a "rapid publication of short reports"
journal of some quality. It has a special section devoted to "Soft
matter, Biological, and Interdisciplinary Physics" with a significant
number, perhaps a half-dozen, articles each week related to biology,
usually biophysics. I believe the paper in question is purely a
theoretical exposition in population genetics which could be
appropriate in a journal which does publish statistical mechanics,
random walk and diffusion, and other probability theory type papers.
The paper is available in PubMed
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14683340
and so might be picked up even by people not accustomed to looking at
that journal.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Harshman" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 09:47:53 PM |
|
|
r norman wrote:
On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 22:50:36 +0000 (UTC), John Harshman
<jharshman.diespamdie@pacbell.net> wrote:
r norman wrote:
<snip history>
It is probably in a Physics journal because the first two authors are
physicists.
See, I always thought that journals were organized by subject matter,
not by the professions of the authors. If I had a couple of thoughts on
the three body problem, I would not submit them to Genetics, even though
I'm a biologist. Perhaps they had some kind of in with the editors. But
how would this get past a reviewer? And how is a physicist qualified to
review a biology paper anyway?
There is some more mathematically oriented stuff there,
sometimes excellent quality and sometimes physicists playing at
biology with a lot of math but little significance.
One is reminded of Fred Hoyle reinventing population genetics.
Physical Review Letters is a "rapid publication of short reports"
journal of some quality. It has a special section devoted to "Soft
matter, Biological, and Interdisciplinary Physics" with a significant
number, perhaps a half-dozen, articles each week related to biology,
usually biophysics. I believe the paper in question is purely a
theoretical exposition in population genetics which could be
appropriate in a journal which does publish statistical mechanics,
random walk and diffusion, and other probability theory type papers.
The paper is available in PubMed
It would seem more appropriate for a journal devoted to, oh, I don't
know, theoretical population genetics. J. Theoretical Biology, for
example. This still strikes me as weird.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14683340
and so might be picked up even by people not accustomed to looking at
that journal.
.
|
|
|
| User: "r norman" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
07 Jul 2004 10:00:01 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 02:47:53 +0000 (UTC), John Harshman
<jharshman.diespamdie@pacbell.net> wrote:
r norman wrote:
Physical Review Letters is a "rapid publication of short reports"
journal of some quality. It has a special section devoted to "Soft
matter, Biological, and Interdisciplinary Physics" with a significant
number, perhaps a half-dozen, articles each week related to biology,
usually biophysics. I believe the paper in question is purely a
theoretical exposition in population genetics which could be
appropriate in a journal which does publish statistical mechanics,
random walk and diffusion, and other probability theory type papers.
The paper is available in PubMed
It would seem more appropriate for a journal devoted to, oh, I don't
know, theoretical population genetics. J. Theoretical Biology, for
example. This still strikes me as weird.
Agreed,. Perhaps the choice of journal is really determined by the
type of people that sit on your promotion and tenure review committee!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Schaffner" |
|
| Title: Re: Natural Selection |
11 Jul 2004 10:00:19 AM |
|
|
r norman <rsn_@_comcast.net> writes:
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 02:47:53 +0000 (UTC), John Harshman
<jharshman.diespamdie@pacbell.net> wrote:
r norman wrote:
Physical Review Letters is a "rapid publication of short reports"
journal of some quality. It has a special section devoted to "Soft
matter, Biological, and Interdisciplinary Physics" with a significant
number, perhaps a half-dozen, articles each week related to biology,
usually biophysics. I believe the paper in question is purely a
theoretical exposition in population genetics which could be
appropriate in a journal which does publish statistical mechanics,
random walk and diffusion, and other probability theory type papers.
The paper is available in PubMed
It would seem more appropriate for a journal devoted to, oh, I don't
know, theoretical population genetics. J. Theoretical Biology, for
example. This still strikes me as weird.
Agreed,. Perhaps the choice of journal is really determined by the
type of people that sit on your promotion and tenure review committee!
Having now read the paper, I find its publication in PRL even more
strange. PRL is probably the most prestigious physics journal in the
world, and this paper isn't anything like a ground-breaking piece of
work, even if it had something to do with physics, which it doesn't.
Their conclusion states
The analysis of asexual lineages growing unconstrained
from a single founder has revealed at least two
remarkable effects. First, we find that for the neutral
regime, the ratchet is halted completely provided condition
(12) is met. Second, we show that for the case of
deleterious mutations, selection eventually brings the
ratchet to a complete halt. Interestingly, the ratchet undergoes
an initial but transitory period of acceleration when
the effect of mutation is small (s < 0:1).
Their first remarkable result is trivial: it just states that
if the average number of offspring per generation with no new
mutations is greater than one, the least loaded class will never die
out (ignoring stochastic effects, which they do). Not much of a
surprise. The second result is also unsurprising, since Muller's
ratchet only operates in small populations; they are considering an
expanding population, and an important characteristic of expanding
populations is that they eventually stop being small. The final
comment I quoted above is the only part I found surprising, and that
was the part of the paper I couldn't understand (that is, I couldn't
understand their explanation for this effect).
--
Steve Schaffner
Immediate assurance is an excellent sign of probable lack of
insight into the topic. Josiah Royce
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
