Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 21:41:45 EDT From: Biodan@aol.com To: cp@opus.hpl.hp.com Message-Id: <aabcdefg1445$foo@default> Subject: Re: CP Genes
Davion,
Nope, the number of chromosomes has nothing to do with evolutionary
history in the sense that fewer equals more primitive. (If that were so,
then humans with 46 would be more primitive than bonobos or chimpanzees with
48! Hmmmm ... now that I think of it, maybe there IS something to that!)
All jest aside for the moment, organisms tend to lose and/or gain genetic
material over time (witness the human Y chromosome) through various
mechanisms - deletion, translocation, nondisjunction, hybridization, etc.
I believe the current studies would indicate that that or those species
possessing the most of it's genome in common with others would most likely be
ancestral. Using cladistical analysis, those characteristics found in all or
most species would be considered 'primitive' while those found less
frequently would be 'derived'. So, one would need only identify traits of
note within a group (ie. CPs) then do a cladogram to determine the most
likely candidate(s) for 'ancestor-hood'.
Or, you could use a genetics lab to determine mutation rates within
mitochondrial DNA and follow similar cladistical analyses. Of course this
would require the sequencing of the DNA - a laborious task even with today's
advances.
Dan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 02 2001 - 17:35:08 PST