/sci/ - Science & Math

maybe they both had the same mutation

mutation, how does it work?

Science documentaries aren't going to watch themselves, OP. Please educate yourself before looking like an ass.

>>2791341
wincest up in this bitch.

No, animals with different number of chromosomes can make babies, its just uncommon

See:Przewalski's Horse and Regular horses

Mutations in can be as small as just one bade mssing from a DNA sequence. So, they can have the same amount of chromosomes and still pass down their mutation. You just have to remember that evolution took place over MILLIONS and MILLIONS of years. These subtle changes added up a lot.

>>2791325
(1) They totally can mate and have offspring, but the offspring are typically sterile (see: donkeys)

(2) Better explanation than what I can give:
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/04/basics_how_can_chromosome_numb.php

I'm not saging because this is actually a legitimate question even if it WAS meant to troll.

*base
*missing

OP if you're going to troll evolutionfags go for the unexplained reverse-Lamarckism.

IE: humans losing their appendix, smaller and smaller dentition, humans being significantly weaker than neanderthals/homo erectus/apes in general.

>>2791631
Yeah, relatively unnecessary/unused features going away has always confused me and any of my professors I asked.

Can't really say that a .5% less protein using, weaker tool user is going to be selected for over the alternative.

>>2791631
>>2791659
itt we lack a basic understanding of evolution

Is there real proof of significant mutations occurring?
I feel like some scientist was just like 'Oh mutations could have caused this' and everyone was like 'Hey that makes sense!' and now it's treated as some scientific fact for the means behind evolution.

Well, who says they cant? I know different chromosome numbers almost always fucks things up, but, not always.

Like if you have a double of any chomosome you wont survive infancy, unless its a double of chromosome 21 (downs syndrome) or a sex chromosome (some transgender something).

But this cant account for all mutations. Look at apes and humans. Human beings have 46 chromosomes and apes have 44 (I believe). That means 23 from each human parent and 22 from each ape parent.

That means human beings and apes, while having very similar genes, have an extra chromosome. Well how could that chromosome exist?

If you look at the apes chromosomes, lets just say, the DNA says 1 2 3 4 5 6 7, and you look at the same chromosome in human beings it just says 1 2 3 4 and the extra one says 3 4 5 6 7.

What you have is 3/5s of one of the ape chrosomes and then about another 3/5s of the same chromosome starting at a different point.

While different number of chromosomes appears to disprove evolution, it actually provides a really great point of divergence, proving evolution.

Unless some of you anti-evolution fags are willing to even say "WELL ITS JUST A COINCIDENCE"

>>2791720

Sorry, I could have worded a lot of that way better. I hope my point still shines through.

>>2791728
Very nice,very nice.

>>2791720
Yea but everything you just said is entirely speculation. Just because something looks convenient doesn't necessarily mean it's correct.

And I'm not anti-evolution. Evolution has been proven to exist through observation. I'm anti-people making hypothesis and stating them as facts without actually proving a causation.

>>2791325
some animals actually can, hell, plants do it all the time (plant sex is horrible and freaky and why we have modern wheat and corn)

>>2791719
>significant mutations
whycan'tIhold_allthiscancer.jpg

Also lrn2Chernobyl.

>>2791762

I think it would be an extremely large coinsedence.

It would be the equivalent of saying that the theory of gravity doesnt adequately explain gravity, because God is actually pushing and pulling everything, and he just happened to push and pull of those things under the same formula every time.

>>2791325
I think the question is this:

How did species evolve different numbers of chromosomes.

ITT: no one answered so far

>Troll: 1 /sci/fags: 0

>>2791778
Actually, science doesn't say god couldn't be doing it.

Science just says it happens in a way that's predictable.

At the furthest pushes of science, we have m-theory with the 11-dimensional universe which furnishes it's own existence, but someone will inevitably argue for an infinitely time-long object, there is a distinction with it existing vs not existing, therefore it must have been created.

Basically, since there is no logic without making presumptions, and further there is no universe without constants, there is always argument for the creation of the system, which will always leave the possibility of a creation event, which comes from a creation event, etc, all the way up.

>>2791778
What exactly is the.. theory? Of ... Gravity?

>>2791788
Read what I linked 7 posts into this thread (Yes, it's TL;DR because it's complicated. It's still the best explanation associated with this thread):
>>2791361

Animals with different chromosomes can have babies.

Simple situation:

There exists 1 chromosome pair for an organism. Now in order for there to be more chromosomes, at least two things can happen:

1. The chromosome can split. In this case, due to coding or other such chemical error, part of the chromosome is separated. Assuming the species is bisexual, then the offspring have a 50% chance of gaining this extra chromosome. If the chromosome change isn't lethal, this extra chromosome will perpetuate, and continue to unravel and produce proteins and things, although it may of course not if it's inactive. However, there can be any number of situations where the genes could be activated, all dependent on the way the chromosomes translate to RNA and produce things. If we assume even that the genes are dormant, the cell would still replicate them, and minor variations due to radiation and coding errors could produce things which later on become active.

2) Another organism, like many virii, can insert genes into hosts, and incorporate DNA from hosts. In this way, both the virus and the host can accrue new chromosomes.

Fascinating bit of info, a large part of our DNA is 'junk' DNA, stuff which has never been found to influence our biology. In this case, it's likely it's "obsolete" DNA, which has been rendered inaccessible to activation machineries, or creates unstable things which simply break down and get converted back to useful things.

also, give it another 1000-5000 years and say goodbye to your Y chromosome :D

> Y chromosome
> halfway there