On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 23:37:26 +0000 (UTC), mat_aidin{at}yahoo.com (Asdf)
wrote:

>I have searched for a couple of days for conclusive articles that
>address DNA mutation, to no avail. I am wondering if anyone can point
>me to a book or article on the subject from an expert in the field, or
>talk to me about it here, and cite references?
>
>Specifically, I was interested in the difference between spontaneous
>exchanges in mutatations, where one nucleotide is exchanged for
>another during DNA replication, and Insertions, whereby one or more of
>the nucleotides are added into the new DNA strands. I understand the
>difference between "exchange" and "insert", but I
am more curious as
>to the type of information that is being copied or added in these
>respective cases.
>
>>From what I have read, the polymerase reads information from existing
>DNA strands; and therefore, in the case of exchanges and insertions,
>the nucleotides that are added or exchanged come from pre-existing
>genetic information. My paper needs to discuss this (in addition to
>deletions), and the possibility of the "accidental" addition of
>genetic information that did not exist at all, previously.
>
>Please be aware that I am not in the least bit interested in
>"theories". I am in need of conclusive proof that during exchanges
>and/or insertions, there are cases in which nucleotides that did not
>exist previously are "written" to the new DNA; this is critical in
>showing that mutation in such a manner-- not mutation from existing
>genetic information, but mutation affording *new* genetic information
>-- would be responsible for *new* appearances, behavioral patterns,
>etc. rather than merely of the ensuing organisms. After weeks of
>searching on the internet, I have not found discussion of any such
>proof, so I assume it is concealed in a book somewhere... I would
>greatly appreciate some information in this area.
>
>Thanks!
>-Mat

A nice intro to the ideas is at
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mutations.html#types

I don't know what you mean by "proof".  Isn't DNA sequencing
sufficient?  If you start with a sequence ACCGAT and end with ACAGAT,
isn't that "proof" of a substitution?  If you end with ACGAT or
ACCAGAT, aren't those proof of deletion or insertion? The
"information" that is being changed is, specifically, the sequence of
base elements in the genome. There are other mutations of a much
larger scale, chromosomal modifications, which are another story
altogether.

I suspect you are really trolling for "hard proof" of a mutation that
suddenly produces a whole new phenomenon, like an eye or a bacterial
flagellum or the like! That is why you use phrases like "not ... from
existing genetic information" .  It doesn't happen that way!   But DNA
mutation is an absolute observable fact.
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 7/22/03 1:45:30 PM