Mutation Rates: To answer the question of, "do you think mutation rates evolve?", I think that yes, they do evolve! Darwin talks of how individuals in a population have variation, and that how selection helps to pick and choose what traits are best fit to the environment that the organism lives in. So, it would make sense that mutation rates would also evolve. Depending on the organism and what their environment is like, having a fast, or even slow mutation rate high could be more beneficial than the other. So, natural selection would pick the rate that would be the most beneficial, and then in turn evolve the rate. It might become faster or slower overtime.
Now, what makes a fast mutation beneficial and what makes a slow mutation rate beneficial? A fast mutation rate might be better fit because and organism might not be very fit in their environment, so a faster mutation rate would speed up the chance of a beneficial mutation happening in the population. A slow mutation rate might be good to have when an organism is already fit in their environment. Why change something when it isn't broken? Another reason a slow mutation rate is a good thing to have is that there is less of a chance for mistakes. When you are doing something super quick, there is a good chance that there will be some errors. Less errors means that the organism will probably reproduce and pass on their genes better than an organism that has a bunch of mistakes, (at least for the most part).
Personally, if I had to choose between having a slow mutation rate and a fast mutation rate, I think I would choose slow. In an article I read, Michael Lynch, a evolutionary biologist at the University at Arizona State University said that, "bacteria, paramecia, yeasts, and nematodes—all of which have much larger populations than humans—have mutation rates orders of magnitude lower [than humans]" (Pennisi). These organisms have lived for millions of years and they are still kicking it with a slow mutation rate. It seems like the right route to go to me!
Source:
Pennisi, Elizabeth. “Why Microbes Are Better than People at Keeping Dna Mutations at Bay.” Science, American Association for the Advancement of Science, https://www.science.org/news/2018/04/why-microbes-are-better-people-keeping-dna-mutations-bay.
Love how you cited you quote. I also think that you have a good understanding of mutations and are able to apply it to class information. I also feel that using this information will be able to help in your R studio explanation work.
ReplyDeleteHey Emmary,
ReplyDeleteI think we both had similar ideas about how mutation rates change with the environment. However, it wasn't until after class on Tuesday that I considered the role of DNA Polymerase as the baseline factor of changing mutations. It makes perfect sense, though, that if there is a mutation in the gene coding for the proteins that make up DNA Polymerase, it might make more mutative mistakes as it functions later on.
Great post overall, and I love the quote - so true!
Hi Emmary, I wanted to ask that if mutations are random then do you still think they have the ability to evolve? You make a convincing arguement.
ReplyDeleteGood yes, nice brain work! I'm gonna do the asshole teacher thing and also ask another question: how might environment affect mutation rate? Think about variability!
ReplyDeleteHi Emmary, I am going to do the student's work and try to answer Madison's questions for you. I think environmental influences do affect mutation rates. We can see how organisms can adapt due to stress-induced circumstances. They can even fall into maladaptation as a consequence of harsh environments, which can also increase mutation rates
ReplyDelete