6 ms·
Jellyfish Genome Hints That Complexity Isn’t Genetically Complex
- karmakaze 8y agoThis is a great discovery and opens up a good research area for experimentation. Coming from a math/computer background this result doesn't seem so surprising. Sometimes we can get complex results with very simple rules like cellular automata. It's the opposite result to having many genes change randomly with little resulting change in behaviour. Both can happen. We have yet to know if this was just by chance or if their was a more efficient mechanism in play.
- vincnetas 8y agoCame here to say the same. Mandelbrot fractal "DNA" is very simple yet, you get infinite complexity from it depending on what point you're looking at (it's like evolution is shifting a viewbox to get a "better" view).
- toolslive 8y agoYes, even more mundane: Pi has infinite complexity too (if you look at the decimals), while there are simple generator functions.
- trashtester 8y agoTrue. That is a different type of complexity, though. While the digits in Pi appear like white noise, fractals have a very distinct sense of orderliness, but with infinite detail. The latter tends to be more fascinating for most people. Technically, the first is called disorganized complexity and the second organized complexity.
- novaRom 8y ago> Technically, the first is called disorganized complexity and the second organized complexity. Sorry, but can you point any source please supporting your statement?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- trashtester 8y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complexity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complexity
- copperx 8y agoWouldn't Pi have very low complexity, according to Kolmogorov?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- j7ake 8y agoIt's not a surprise that the number of genes does not determine complexity of an organism. The humble C. elegans (roundworm) has ~20000 genes, similar to humans. The complexity comes with the regulation of these genes, which are in the noncoding regions of DNA.
- j16sdiz 8y agoThe question is: how organism evolve complexity if no new genes are added? You can regulate the genes to "disable" the complexity, but those genes need to be there in the first place....
- 0-_-0 8y agoCheck out Saplosky's lectures on Youtube, he deals with this question. Particularly this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dRXA1_e30o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dRXA1_e30o
- j7ake 8y agoProteomic diversity can be generated through alternative splicing of genes. Functional diversity of the same gene can be generated through context-specific regulator-to-promoter interactions.
- trashtester 8y agoTrue, and at least at two levels: 1) The amount of DNA does not determine the complexity of an organism. 2) Also, the number of protein-coding genes does not determine the complexity of an organism. You may have meant (2), and only (2). If so, this is clearly true, as much of the complexity comes from non-protein DNA. Still, (1) is also true, but one could argue, more due to random inefficiencies, or alternatively if you rank degree of complexity based only on phenotypes. My preferred definition of complexity, or rather of irreducible complexity, is to say that complexity is determined by the minimum number of bits of information that is needed to create an equivalent output. (where, naturally, the definition of equivalence needs to be supplied for a given domain) By this definition, DNA length (not number of genes) places an upper bound on complexity an organism can have.
- Angostura 8y agoAn interesting book was published by Brian Goodwin about 20 yesrs ago now - How the Leopard Changed it spots. Some people thought of it as an attack on natural selection, but it really wasn't. It was a fascinating look at how the inherent properties of matter could lead to patterns (such as spiral arrangement of leaves or zebra stripes) without intervention from natural selection https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Leopard-Changed-Its-Spots/dp/075380171X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1547720455 https://www.amazon.co.uk/How-Leopard-Changed-Its-Spots/dp/07...
- airstrike 8y agoAbsolutely fascinating. Thanks for sharing
- cproctor 8y agoReading this, I was reminded of Herb Simon's "Sciences of the Artifical," which makes the point that often complexity is the result of interaction with the environment. His example is of an ant walking through sand. The ant follows a complex path, even though its behavior is governed by simple rules. This seems like the same lesson, at another level.
- will_brown 8y ago>You might expect that as bodies became more complex, genomes did as well. I bring this up in threads about diet/nutrition (and always get down voted). But the idea is humans have about 20,000 protein coding genes and something as simple as wheat has estimated 150,000 to 334,000. Where I get downvotes is the concept/hypothesis (not mine) that the explaination rests with the microbiome (which we have and something like wheat doesn’t). I’d be interested in learning if complex creatures like jellyfish with simple genomes have a complex microbiome.
- hutzlibu 8y agohint: complaining about downvotes usually just gets more downvotes just add what insight you have and then the crowd decides if they care, like or dislike
- will_brown 8y agoI’m not complaining, just acknowledging for the sake of preempting the attacks of comments about microbiome. Almost any comment in a discussion about diet/nutrition is bound to get downvoted (at least on HN). People are probably bound to downvote anything about the microbiome for the same reasons. Yet we know the microbiome is responsible for turning (at least some) genes on/off, and otherwise our study of the microbiome is in its infancy. I’d rather have someone reply about the jelly fish microbiome, if any, than explaination of HN social norms. The cool thing about HN is you might get some expert, in this case a marine biologist lurking, not the social norms.
- jhedwards 8y agoIf you haven't already, you might be interested to read some of Lynn Margulis' work. She was a big proponent of the idea that symbiosis is an overlooked source of speciation. In a book of hers I read recently she emphasized how complex organisms like humans depend on a huge foundation of other simpler organisms. You might find some interesting fuel for your ideas in her books.
- Symmetry 8y ago
- d--b 8y agoHumans developing intelligence is a better example of complexity that arose from small differences in genome. Jellyfish aren't that fancy, right? From what I understood they're like a stomach and some kind of "muscle" that make them go up or down. They've got some poisonous chemicals and other things, but plants do have this too. Jellyfish remind me of the 2-neuron "neural network" that can play flappy bird :-)
- matthoiland 8y agoHere's the obligatory link to Conways Game of Life. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_Game_of_Life >Scholars in various fields, such as computer science, physics, biology, biochemistry, economics, mathematics, philosophy, and generative sciences have made use of the way that complex patterns can emerge from the implementation of the game's simple rules