| Statistics |
Total en línea: 1 Invitados: 1 Usuarios: 0 |
|
Catadores de la Palabra en Google+
Anticovidian v.2 COVID-19: Hypothesis of the Lab Origin Versus a Zoonotic Event which can also be of a Lab Origin: https://zenodo.org/record/3988139
The Apostle Paul declared:
"Test or Prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thess. 5:21).
Following that advice, I post the next considerations:
The Non-Darwinian Mechanism of Sexual Reproduction
Research guidelines provided by John A. Davison
Also look at "John A Davison and the Discrete Nature and Stability of Species":
On reading the writings of John A. Davison I have learned that the role of sexual reproduction is to prevent evolution. I have learned also that the origin of reproduction among living organisms "took place independently," and that it was "an independent occurrence..."
John A. Davison declares:
There is a "discrete nature and stability of the vast majority of all species, both recent and fossil." They can not evolve, "they were produced by instantaneous all-or-none devices ( [i.e.,] chromosome restructurings [, etc.]) which, by definition, can have no intermediate states."
"I accept the physiological definition of species. Two forms that can produce a viable hybrid will be considered separate species if that hybrid proves to be sterile."
"Selection can produce substantial changes in the expression of the genetic potential," "in nature, sexual reproduction seems incapable of proceeding beyond the subspecies. I am unaware of a single instance of the production of a new species through the known agency of sexual reproduction."
"Sexual reproduction [is] a highly conservative device... a virtual standstill... a function which serves to prevent rather than promote progressive change."
"The capacity of the sexual reproductive mode [is] to fine-tune the genetic makeup."
"Sexual reproduction has one great advantage in its capacity to produce virtually unlimited variation within a narrow range. The sexual mode then could be very useful in adapting the organism to minor environmental changes."
"Sexual reproduction is incapable of producing progressive evolutionary change."
"Sexual reproduction tends to prevent rather than promote chromosome restructuring."
This provides a reasonable explanation for the stability of fossil species as Julian Huxley, the author of "Evolution: the modern synthesis" (1942) had concluded. J. Huxley understandably neglected to indicate the source of that view which had resulted from correspondence he had carried on with Robert Broom [Huxley, J. (1942) Evolution: The Modern Synthesis. Harper, New York and London.]
"Huxley got this idea from Robert Broom as a result of a private correspondence between them. Huxley's conviction that evolution is no longer going on has been completely ignored by the neoDarwinians."
JA Davison discovered that Broom and Huxley had corresponded on this matter as early as 1933 as revealed by the following: [Broom declares,] "In a letter I had from Professor Julian Huxley only a few months ago he says, "I have often thought about your idea of the fading out of evolutionary potency, and though I cannot pretend to agree with some of the philosophical corollaries which you draw from it, I more and more believe that it is of great importance as a fact." Huxley shared those Broom's scientific conclusions [Broom, R. (1933) Evolution -- Is there intelligence behind it? South African Journal of Science, 30: 1-19. See there page 14]
["The comparative analysis of scientific heritage of Richard Goldschmidt and Julian Huxley shows convincingly the resemblance of these two scientists' views... Both scientists belonged to initiators of development genetics... the concept of preadaptive mutations proposed by Huxley was close to Goldschmidt's idea of macromutants... They developed the larger biological problems in a similar way... Evo-Devo rediscovered Goldshmidt's Biology and Huxley's Synthesis": http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14723173]
"Leo Berg insisted that chance played no role in either ontogeny or phylogeny" [Berg, L. (1969) Nomogenesis; or, Evolution Determined by Law. M.I.T. Press, Cambridge. (Original Russian edition 1922.)]
["Berg has foreseen the development of molecular biology. Thus he was the foreteller of our branch of science. The theory of nomogenesis emphasized the limitations of natural selection"... Even the most conscientious critics of Berg have misrepresented the real sense of his works... [reader please,] separate "the grains from weeds": http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=3309616]
"A sufficient factual body now exists to warrant serious consideration to the proposal that there has been, as Robert Broom had suggested, a teleological origin (plan) for biological information" and its expression.
"Needless to say, the realization of this prospectus will have a profound effect on the way in which man regards his position in the universe."
"The Darwinians might simply say that the sexual model could also produce chromosome and gene homozygosity through the inbreeding associated with small or insular populations. It is precisely here that their hypothesis fails. For example, the biota of the Galapagos Islands closely resembles that of neighboring Ecuador. Darwin's celebrated finches have all been placed in the genus (or subgenus) Geospiza. Since they are all extremely similar, it is not surprising to learn that they produce spontaneous fertile and genetically fit hybrids" [Grant PR, Grant BR. Genetics and the origin of bird species. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Jul 22;94(15):7768-75: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=9223262].
"In addition to size, great variations in [canine] coat quality, color and temperament have been produced. All of these differences are due to the action of Mendelian genes segregating and recombining in sexual reproduction, with the result that dogs are still able to hybridize freely with wolves. The hybrids are of course fertile which is to say that they are not really species hybrids at all."
[Some Indexed References:
"A male coyote hybridized with a female dog, and female hybrid offspring successfully integrated into the coyote population..." "The introgression of domestic dog genes into the southeastern coyote population does not appear to have substantially affected the coyote's genetic, morphological, or behavioural integrity. However, our results suggest that, contrary to previous reports, hybridization can occur between domestic and wild canids, even when the latter is relatively abundant."
Adams JR, Leonard JA, Waits LP. Widespread occurrence of a domestic dog mitochondrial DNA haplotype in southeastern US coyotes. Mol Ecol. 2003 Feb;12(2):541-6.
"The red wolf (Canis rufus), native to much of the southeastern United States, is endangered by man's activities and by hybridization with other species of the genus Canis."
Ferrell RE, Morizot DC, Horn J, Carley CJ. Biochemical markers in a species endangered by introgression: the red wolf. Biochem Genet. 1980 Feb;18(1-2):39-49.
"The principal threat to the persistence of the endangered red wolf (Canis rufus) in the wild is hybridization with the coyote (Canis latrans)."
Miller CR, Adams JR, Waits LP. Pedigree-based assignment tests for reversing coyote (Canis latrans) introgression into the wild red wolf (Canis rufus) population. Mol Ecol. 2003 Dec;12(12):3287-301.
"Chinese and Japanese" managed to duplicate the anal fin thereby converting the fish (the goldfish) from a quadruped to a hexapod and even duplicated the tail, a condition which does not exist in the natural world. They also removed the dorsal fin seriously impairing the animal's capacity to swim properly. None of this has produced any semblance of speciation and the animals are still Asiatic carp (Carassius auratus)."
"Some remarkably odd (goldfish) creatures those with telescopic eyes, some of which even look upward as in the variety "celestial.""
[Websites: http://www.bristol-aquarists.org.uk/goldfish/celest/celest.htm (pictures), http://www.elgoldfish.com/articulos/graham2.html (figures, in Spanish); Ohkuma M, Matsumura M. Retinal degeneration of the celestial goldfish (author's transl). Nippon Ganka Gakkai Zasshi. 1980;84(5):350-3; Sakaue H, Negi A, Matsumura M, Ohkuma M, Honda Y. The developmental changes of ERGs on spontaneous retinal degeneration of Celestial goldfish. Doc Ophthalmol. 1988 Sep;70(1):97-101: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=3229298; " Certain strains of goldfish are characterized by large bulging eyes which have been shown to be extremely myopic". The fact that similar findings are reported in the case of experimental myopia in chicks, suggests the existence of a fundamental mechanism of refractive development for the vertebrate eye." Seltner RL, Weerheim JA, Sivak JG. Role of the lens and vitreous humor in the refractive properties of the eyes of three strains of goldfish. Vision Res. 1989;29(6):681-5: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2626825]
"Thus, by a physiological criterion they are one species and, as with dogs and goldfish, no significant evolution has really taken place. They too reproduce sexually."
"The standard Darwinian response is that evolution takes too long to be observable, an assumption which renders that proposal untestable."
"The [evolutionarily conceived] horse series shows an increase in size coupled with a decrease in digits. However, this series is not linear so the intermediate organisms cannot be arranged in any certain fashion. Furthermore, they differ from one another in so many independent factors that they must be relegated to separate genera. What we actually observe is the appearance of discrete phenotypes with no evidence of what might be described as missing links. This is exactly what one sees when one observes extant related organisms."
"There are limits to the developments possible, and these limits follow a law (the Law of the Reversion to the Average)." "I know from my experience that I can develop a plum half an inch long or one two and a half inches long, with every possible length in between, but I am willing to admit that it is hopeless to try to get a plum the size of a pea, or one as big as a grapefruit" [Burbank, L. (1939) Partner of Nature. D. Appleton-Century Co., New York; Burbank, L., 1931 The Harvest Of The Years. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, New York.]
"The ratio of five to one in the lengths of his plums corresponds to a mass ratio of 125 to 1 (five cubed), which agrees favorably with what man has been able to achieve with dogs (Great Danes versus some of the miniature breeds) or, for example, with the size of the fruits of tomato varieties. Burbank admits the futility of exceeding the limits he indicates and the prospect of speciation apparently never crosses his mind."
["During the first half of the twentieth century, the horticulturist Luther Burbank was largely considered an irrelevant figure by the scientific community, despite winning acclaim from the public as an eminent scientist... Burbank stories directly engaged the question of who should legitimately count as a student of nature the possibility of a philosophy of nature based on the concept of "living matter," as opposed to one grounded on mechanistic principles: his convictions regarding the power of the environment to release latent characteristics in physiological material held in common. Tales of Luther Burbank and science in the American vernacular. Isis. 2001 Sep;92(3):484-516: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11810893]
"Mendelism is of course the genetics associated with sexual reproduction... Luther Burbank and William Bateson each independently questioned the capacity of sexual reproduction to support evolutionary change... These were not mere coincidences but reasoned conclusions reached after a careful consideration of all the facts which were then available. None of this can be accommodated within the Darwinian model. We owe these men a great debt... i.e. sexual forms are incapable of progressive change. The obvious inference is that sexual reproduction is the "Blind Alley" of evolution." "Note Bateson's use of the expression blind alley." "Bateson had the insight to recognize and the courage to admit." "Just as William Bateson indicated even before 1900, I too find it amazing how long the Darwinian view has prevailed in the face of an enormous and continually growing body of information with which it cannot possibly be reconciled."
["The legacy of Mendel's pioneering studies of hybridization in the pea continues to influence the way we understand modern genetics... With genetics standing at the center of our present biomedical and biotechnological research, an examination of the history of our concepts in the field can help us better understand what we should and should not expect from current genetic claims. For that enterprise there is no better starting place than Mendel himself." Allen GE. Mendel and modern genetics: the legacy for today. Endeavour. 2003 Jun;27(2):63-8: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12798810 ,
To study the classic paper of Mendel, go to:
"Mendel's laws in the context of discussing human inheritance and the transmission of pathologies was pervading the medical literature from the 1920s onwards... In contrast to reluctant botanists and zoologists, the elite of the French medical profession was often 'Mendelian'... the 'Mendelization' of human pathologies after the war... facilitated the rise of medical genetics as a speciality focusing on genetic counselling and on the management of computable hereditary risks." Gaudilliere JP. Mendelism and medicine: controlling human inheritance in local contexts, 1920-1960. C R Acad Sci III. 2000 Dec;323(12):1117-26: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11147098 , "Mendelian genetics gave birth to a revolution in plant and animal breeding which produced the spectacular 20th century agricultural progress and made it possible to feed the exploding population of the Earth... Plant and animal breeding continued to depend mainly on the old 19th century techniques, hybridization, mass selection and individual selection. But they were combined and used in much more efficient ways than before. New theoretical knowledge, general theories as well as particular knowledge about species, strains and individuals, radically improved the planning and execution of breeding work." Roll-Hansen N. Theory and practice: the impact of Mendelism on agriculture. C R Acad Sci III. 2000 Dec;323(12):1107-16: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11147097]
["William Bateson coined the term genetics and, more than anybody else, championed the principles of heredity discovered by Gregor Mendel. Nevertheless, his reputation is soured by the positions he took about the discontinuities in inheritance... Chromosomes are the sites of genes but genes move between chromosomes much more readily than had been previously believed and chromosomes are not causal in individual development." J Genet. 2002 Aug;81(2):49-58. William Bateson: a biologist ahead of his time. Bateson P.: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12532036 , "Bateson turned to botanists, zoologists, and physiologists associated with Newnham College, Cambridge, for critical assistance in advancing his research program at a time when Mendelism was not yet recognized as a legitimate field of study. Cambridge women carried out a series of breeding experiments in a number of plant and animal species between 1902 and 1910, the results of which provided crucial evidence that both supported and extended Mendel's laws of heredity women in science in the early twentieth century was a factor--along with scientific, institutional, social, and political developments--in establishing the new discipline of genetics." Richmond ML. Women in the early history of genetics. William Bateson and the Newnham College Mendelians, 1900-1910. Isis. 2001 Mar;92(1):55-90: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11441497 , "The second century of poultry genetics, coming 100 years after the use of the chicken to demonstrate Mendelian inheritance in animals by William Bateson." Cytogenet Genome Res. 2003;102(1-4):291-6. Chicken genome sequence: a centennial gift to poultry genetics. Dodgson JB.: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14970719 , "William Bateson's plenary address to the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Toronto in 1921 was titled "Evolutionary Faith and Modern Doubts." In it he expressed his deep-seated skepticism about the causes of evolution (and in particular, his dissatisfaction with Darwinian natural selection)... The address led to controversy at both the scientific and popular levels. Scientific criticism centered on Bateson's rejection of natural selection; popular controversy, as evidenced by contemporary newspaper clippings, was very widespread..." J Hered. 1989 Mar-Apr;80(2):96-9. Bateson's two Toronto addresses, 1921: 2. Evolutionary faith. Cock AG.: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2647826 , "Although both were controversial, the text of the second, "The Outlook of Genetics," was never published. I present a transcript of a partial text and notes of this address in which Bateson explains, for the first time in public, a recent change in his views on the chromosome theory of heredity which resulted from a week spent with T. H. Morgan's group in New York en route to Toronto. He now accepts "the main essentials" but withholds assent from what he calls "the many extensions" of chromosome theory (such as linkage theory). He devotes considerably more space to discussing what he sees as difficulties precluding an unqualified acceptance of chromosome theory in its entirety. All in all, his tone is defiant rather than penitent." J Hered. 1989 Mar-Apr;80(2):91-5. Bateson's two Toronto addresses, 1921: 1. Chromosomal skepticism. Cock AG.: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2647825 , "Cyril Dean Darlington (1903-1981) has been forgotten by historians, but was in his day, the leading cytologist of the premolecular era. Of humble and inconspicuous beginnings, Darlington started his career as an unpaid volunteer worker under the aging William Bateson. Working in almost total isolation and with no scientific guidance, he boldly deduced the laws of chromosome behaviour, making cytology relevant once again." Endeavour. 2003 Jun;27(2):69-74. Darlington and the 'invention' of the chromosome. Harman O.: , Ann Sci. 1983 Jan;40:19-59. William Bateson's rejection and eventual acceptance of chromosome theory. Cock AG.; Br J Hist Sci. 1987 Oct;20(67):399-420. William Bateson's introduction of Mendelism to England: a reassessment. Olby R.]
"Subspecies are actually, therefore, neither incipient species nor models for the origin of species. They are more or less diversified blind alleys within the species" [In 1940 (two years before Huxley's "Evolution: The Modern Synthesis") Goldschmidt published The Material Basis of Evolution, based on the Silliman lectures he had delivered at Yale University] (Goldschmidt, R. B., 1940 The Material Basis Of Evolution. p. 249. Yale University Press, New Haven.)
"The male-determining (Y) chromosomes lack, both quantitatively and qualitatively, the semblance one would expect had the four genera [man, chimpanzee, gorilla and orangutan] evolved through sexual reproduction. Other differences include alterations in chromosome ends or telomeres as well as variations in the position of nucleolar organizers..." [Davison on doing a critical review of: Yunis JJ, Prakash O. The origin of man: a chromosomal pictorial legacy. Science. 1982 Mar 19;215(4539):1525-30: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=7063861]
"It has yet to be demonstrated that any creature reproducing by obligatory sexual means is capable of evolution beyond the generic level. Since 1984 no response to that challenge has been forthcoming and so I repeat the proposition. I hope the present paper will serve to stimulate a lively response from the community of evolutionists."
"It has yet to be demonstrated that any diploid organism, reproducing by obligatory sexual means, is capable of exceeding the subspecies level..." "I place the burden of proof on the Darwinians by challenging them to present karyotypic, genetic, taxonomic, fossil, or any other kind of evidence indicating that true species, genera, families, or any of the higher taxonomic categories have ever been produced or can now be produced through the agency of sexual reproduction. I, in general agreement with [Michael J.D.] White, can find nothing in support of that proposition." "White is saying that... speciation has not been produced sexually." [Davison on commenting, White, M.J.D. (1973) Animal Cytology and Evolution. Comstock Publ. Co., Ithaca, New York; and Davison, JA (1984) J. Theor.Biol. 111: 725-735.]
[May 27, 2004. The Scientist (http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20040527/01): Chimps are not like humans. Whole-chromosome comparison reveals much greater genetic differences than expected, By Cathy Holding. The vigorous debate on how different chimpanzees are from humans is fuelled by new data in this week's Nature, as the International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium reports that 83% of chimpanzee proteins are different from their human counterparts. The difference is "much more complicated that we initially imagined or speculated," Yoshiyuki Sakaki, who headed the consortium, told The Scientist.Sakaki said their analysis found about 68,000 insertions or deletions. "That is almost one insertion/deletion every 470 bases," he said. Early molecular comparisons between humans and chimpanzees suggested that the species are very similar to each other at the nucleotide sequence level-a difference of between 1.23% and 5%, Sakaki said. The results reported this week showed that "83% of the genes have changed between the human and the chimpanzee-only 17% are identical-so that means that the impression that comes from the 1.2% [sequence] difference is [misleading]. In the case of protein structures, it has a big effect," Sakaki said."They found a lot of length differences rather than single-base changes, and the fact that those seem to occur in coding sequences more than expected was one of the surprising findings of the paper," said Matthew Webster, from the Evolutionary Biology Centre at Uppsala University, Sweden. "[The authors] also found that there were more changes than you might expect in length within coding sequences which don't interrupt the function."Webster said that by incorporating gene expression data with comparisons of the human and chimpanzee genes, the authors had provided an approach that would be important in the future, particularly when the chimpanzee genome was finished. Original Article: International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium, "DNA sequence and comparative analysis of chimpanzee chromosome 22," Nature, 429:382-388, May 27, 2004. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15164055
Related topic: Bailey JA, Yavor AM, Viggiano L, Misceo D, Horvath JE, Archidiacono N, Schwartz S, Rocchi M, Eichler EE. Human-specific duplication and mosaic transcripts: the recent paralogous structure of chromosome 22. Am J Hum Genet. 2002 Jan;70(1):83-100. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11731936
Matthew Webster: http://www.egs.uu.se/evbiol/Persons/Matt.html , "...our perceived sequence divergence of only 1% between these two species appears to be erroneous, because this work... puts both species much further apart," concluded Tatsuya Anzai et al. They used comparative genomics to reveal a total of 64 insertion/deletions (indels) >100 bp long in the human sequence (mismatches were represented by 9% substitutions and by over 90% indels) in the entire MHC region. The major histocompatibility locus (MHC) contains some 224 genes and is one of the most gene-dense regions of the human genome. Holding C: Driving man and chimp apart. Indels, not single base substitutions, in the MHC region account for differential immune responses. Genome Biology. June 26, 2003. Source:
http://genomebiology.com/researchnews/default.asp?arx_id=gb-spotlight-20030626-01 , Anzai T et al. Comparative sequencing of human and chimpanzee MHC class I regions unveils insertions/deletions as the major path to genomic divergence. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jun 24;100(13):7708-13. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12799463]
"Sexual reproduction is not well suited to the elimination of genetic defects. Nearly all point mutations are deleterious if not lethal; in the sexual mode, they tend to accumulate. Particularly vulnerable are animals that reproduce infrequently." JA Davison
"All of the necessary genetic information for both sexes is contained in the female genome." JA Davison
"The capacity of the female genome to produce both sexes is not limited to the vertebrates since it is also demonstrable in the social insects, water fleas (Cladocera) and rotifers just to mention a few of many invertebrate examples. The same capacity is obvious in all monoecious (hermaphroditic) organisms, examples of which occur throughout both the animal and plant kingdoms."
"I agree with Michael J.D. White... there is no compelling evidence that point (base pair) mutations have ever played a role in evolution beyond the production of varieties or subspecies. Quite the contrary, all expermental attempts with selection for such mutations has met with not only failure but with a decrease in general fitness... The time is long past due to consider some alternatives to the Darwinian model" [Posted by nosivad (Member # 767) on 14. April 2004, 07:34]
"Like differentiation, ecological succession and growth, phylogeny has been, in my opinion, a self-limiting process in which sexual reproduction has served to terminate and stabilize the creative sequence. This view demands only the original actions of an incomprehensibly intelligent creator" [Posted by nosivad (Member # 767) on 20. April 2004, 08:01]
"Why might some insist that evolution is still in progress? I propose it is in large part due to the acceptance of authority. For centuries, Aristotelian physics was accepted because it made intuitive sense that the heavier an object was, the faster it would fall... Darwin and Wallace unhesitatingly accepted the authority of Lyell and his doctrine of Uniformitarianism." JA Davison
"How, or how many times, life has originated?" a question raised by JA Davison.
Some References:
Adams JR, Leonard JA, Waits LP. Widespread occurrence of a domestic dog mitochondrial DNA haplotype in southeastern US coyotes. Mol Ecol. 2003 Feb;12(2):541-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12535104
Allen GE. Mendel and modern genetics: the legacy for today. Endeavour. 2003 Jun;27(2):63-8: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12798810
Anzai T et al. Comparative sequencing of human and chimpanzee MHC class I regions unveils insertions/deletions as the major path to genomic divergence. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jun 24;100(13):7708-13. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12799463
Bateson P. William Bateson: a biologist ahead of his time. J Genet. 2002 Aug;81(2):49-58: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12532036
Bailey JA, Yavor AM, Viggiano L, Misceo D, Horvath JE, Archidiacono N, Schwartz S, Rocchi M, Eichler EE. Human-specific duplication and mosaic transcripts: the recent paralogous structure of chromosome 22. Am J Hum Genet. 2002 Jan;70(1):83-100. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11731936
Berg, L. (1969) Nomogenesis; or, Evolution Determined by Law. M.I.T. Press, Cambridge. (Original Russian edition 1922.)
Broom, R. (1933) Evolution -- Is there intelligence behind it? South African Journal of Science, 30: 1-19. See there page 14
Bull, J.J. (1983) Evolution of Sex Determining Mechanisms. Benjamin Cummings, Menlo Park.
Bull JJ. Sex determining mechanisms: an evolutionary perspective. Experientia Suppl. 1987;55:93-115. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2961606 ,
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=3899710
Burbank, L., 1931 The Harvest Of The Years. Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, New York.
Burbank, L. (1939) Partner of Nature. D. Appleton-Century Co., New York.
Burt A. Perspective: sex, recombination, and the efficacy of selection--was Weismann right? Evolution Int J Org Evolution. 2000 Apr;54(2):337-51.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10937212
Cock AG. Bateson's two Toronto addresses, 1921: 2. Evolutionary faith. J Hered. 1989 Mar-Apr;80(2):96-9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2647826
Cock AG. Bateson's two Toronto addresses, 1921: 1. Chromosomal skepticism. J Hered. 1989 Mar-Apr;80(2):91-5. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=2647825
Cock AG. William Bateson's rejection and eventual acceptance of chromosome theory. Ann Sci. 1983 Jan;40:19-59.
Custance, A. C. The Seed of the Woman, 1980, Doorway Publications, Ontario, pp. 210-232, 254-267, Online at http://www.custance.org/
Custance AC. Stress-strain relationships of man in the heat. Med Serv J Can. 1967 May;23(5):721-6.
Custance AC. A method of measuring the effect of drugs on sweating as a function of time. Can Med Assoc J. 1966 Oct 22;95(17):871-4.
Custance AC. A self-balancing scale for weighing human subjects. J Appl Physiol. 1966 Sep;21(5):1675-6.
Custance AC. Cycling of sweat gland activity recorded by a new technique. J Appl Physiol. 1962 Jul;17:741-2.
Davison, John A. An Evolutionary Manifesto: A New Hypothesis For Organic Change (2003). ISCID Journal. http://www.uvm.edu/~jdavison/davison-manifesto.htm, http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=000370#000000
Davison, John A. Evolution as a Self-limiting Process (1998). Rivista di Biologia (Biology Forum), 91:2 199-220. http://www.uvm.edu/~jdavison/dpaper.html
Davison, John A. The Blind Alley: Its Significance for Evolutionary Theory (1993). Rivista di Biologia (Biology Forum), 86: 101-110. http://www.uvm.edu/~jdavison/evolution.html
Davison, JA (1984) J. Theor.Biol. 111: 725-735.
Dodgson JB. Chicken genome sequence: a centennial gift to poultry genetics. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2003;102(1-4):291-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14970719
Evolution Facts Encyclopedia: http://evolution-facts.org/a15.htm [Evolution Disproved Series, Pilgrims Books; 1992, Research Institute for Better Reading Inc; Evolution Cruncher, Published by Evolution Facts, Inc.; 2001, Altamont, TN.]
Gavrilov LA, Gavrilova NS. Evolutionary theories of aging and longevity. ScientificWorldJournal. 2002 Feb 7;2:339-56. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12806021
Grant PR, Grant BR. Genetics and the origin of bird species. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Jul 22;94(15):7768-75. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=9223262
Ferrell RE, Morizot DC, Horn J, Carley CJ. Biochemical markers in a species endangered by introgression: the red wolf. Biochem Genet. 1980 Feb;18(1-2):39-49. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=6930264
Gaudilliere JP. Mendelism and medicine: controlling human inheritance in local contexts, 1920-1960. C R Acad Sci III. 2000 Dec;323(12):1117-26: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11147098 . For Example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=OMIM&itool=toolbar
Goldschmidt, R. B., 1940 The Material Basis Of Evolution. p. 249. Yale University Press, New Haven.
Golubovskii MD, Gall IaM. R.Goldschmidt and J. Huxley: creative parallelisms. Zh Obshch Biol. 2003 Nov-Dec;64(6):510-8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14723173
Halilagic A, Zile MH, Studer M. A novel role for retinoids in patterning the avian forebrain during presomite stages. Development 130, 2039-2050 (2003.) http://dev.biologists.org/cgi/content/full/130/10/2039
Harman O. Darlington and the 'invention' of the chromosome. Endeavour. 2003 Jun;27(2):69-74. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12798811
Holding Cathy: Driving man and chimp apart. Indels, not single base substitutions, in the MHC region account for differential immune responses. Genome Biology. June 26, 2003. http://genomebiology.com/researchnews/default.asp?arx_id=gb-spotlight-20030626-01
Huxley, J. (1942) Evolution: The Modern Synthesis. Harper, New York and London.
Kirkwood TB, Cremer T. Cytogerontology since 1881: a reappraisal of August Weismann and a review of modern progress. Hum Genet. 1982;60(2):101-21. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=7042533
Martinez DE, Levinton JS. Asexual metazoans undergo senescence. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1992 Oct 15;89(20):9920-3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11607334
|
|
|
