3 ms·

You don't seem to understand the nature of mutations. It's not really a question of understanding mutations, that's just where the research seems to be leading

You don't seem to understand the nature of mutations. It's not really a question of understanding mutations, that's just where the research seems to be leading us. Phenomena such as the rapid changes in fossil morphology puzzled biologists for much of the second half of the 20th century, but the latest research is suggesting that this is indeed a real effect, and not due to the spotty nature of the fossil record. In the lab, in simulations, and in the real world, we see populations change rapidly in the face of a rapidly changing environment. Don't believe me? Think how quickly the common cold has to mutate to remain viable when faced with the highly adaptive human immune system. Or how about how quickly MRSA has developed. Or how quickly we can change the appearance of a dog breed with selective breeding. Going back to the reefs, if you have a population with millions of individual organisms of each species spread over a large area, it is not unreasonable, due to genetic drift, to expect some of those organisms to already have a few tricks up their sleeve to handle increased acidity. Some will have trick 1, some will have trick 2 etc etc. As the acidity starts to rise, these organisms will have the better success at passing the genes onto their offspring. Those offspring have a good chance of inheriting different tricks from their other parent, making them even better at surviving in the acidified environment. So it goes, the greatest show on earth. The tl;dr version is that the mutations don't have to all hit at once - there will be many mutations already latent in the population due to genetic drift that will help make adapting much faster and easier. Still want to tell me that I don't understand the nature of mutations?

lobster_johnson 16y ago
However, viruses and corals are vastly different things, and comparing them does not necessarily make sense. Viruses like the common cold seem particularly predisposed to rapid mutation as a survival tactic, and this works particularly well because of the sheer scale at which microbes work: There are billions of billions of virus particles around. There are billions of billions of virus particles constantly replicating and often doing it badly. Have we looked at how quickly corals, anemone, nudibranches etc. mutate in the face of extinction? There are vast areas of the oceans (eg., along the Mexican coastline) where the deoxygenation of the water has killed off virtually all life during the last half-century; where is the mutated flora and fauna that learned to adapt to the lower oxygen levels? Sure, I agree that science doesn't necessarily understand all about how stuff evolves or adapts. Nature might find a way to survive. But the way you threw out that (I paraphrase) "I'm not worried, they'll just mutate" is too cavalier a response to this problem.
- demallien 16y ago
  Yes, I can see how "None of which is to say that we shouldn't be fighting against climate change - we should, if nothing else than because, for the reasons listed above, we can't predict the ways that climate change is going to impact us. Unpredictability is generally bad for economic development, which is pretty much the equivalent of saying that it is bad for human sustainability." could be interpreted as "I'm not worried, they'll just mutate"...

lobster_johnson 16y ago

However, viruses and corals are vastly different things, and comparing them does not necessarily make sense. Viruses like the common cold seem particularly predisposed to rapid mutation as a survival tactic, and this works particularly well because of the sheer scale at which microbes work: There are billions of billions of virus particles around. There are billions of billions of virus particles constantly replicating and often doing it badly. Have we looked at how quickly corals, anemone, nudibranches etc. mutate in the face of extinction? There are vast areas of the oceans (eg., along the Mexican coastline) where the deoxygenation of the water has killed off virtually all life during the last half-century; where is the mutated flora and fauna that learned to adapt to the lower oxygen levels? Sure, I agree that science doesn't necessarily understand all about how stuff evolves or adapts. Nature might find a way to survive. But the way you threw out that (I paraphrase) "I'm not worried, they'll just mutate" is too cavalier a response to this problem.

demallien 16y ago
Yes, I can see how "None of which is to say that we shouldn't be fighting against climate change - we should, if nothing else than because, for the reasons listed above, we can't predict the ways that climate change is going to impact us. Unpredictability is generally bad for economic development, which is pretty much the equivalent of saying that it is bad for human sustainability." could be interpreted as "I'm not worried, they'll just mutate"...