Shared human a Great White Shark DNA

The Western Hemisphere. General term for the Americas following their discovery by Europeans, thus setting them in contradistinction to the Old World of Africa, Europe, and Asia.

Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist

Post Reply
kbs2244
Posts: 2469
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:47 pm

Shared human a Great White Shark DNA

Post by kbs2244 » Mon Feb 03, 2014 12:41 pm

For all you DNA addicts.
There are fewer differences in the proportion of gene products between white sharks and humans,

http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/11 ... es-112013/

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/14/697

I am still researching the “sharks are a less cold-blooded fish” statement.
How can you be “less?” Isn’t it a binary thing?

User avatar
Ernie L
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:25 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Shared human a Great White Shark DNA

Post by Ernie L » Mon Feb 03, 2014 5:10 pm

DNA statistics...reminds me of divination using entrails..having said that..I just sent off my entrails...er I mean my spit for DNA divination....this should be good..
Regards Ernie

kbs2244
Posts: 2469
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 12:47 pm

Re: Shared human a Great White Shark DNA

Post by kbs2244 » Thu Feb 06, 2014 12:07 pm

It may explaine why some TV shows are popular.

User avatar
Ernie L
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2009 5:25 pm
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Shared human a Great White Shark DNA

Post by Ernie L » Thu Feb 06, 2014 2:52 pm

kbs2244 wrote:It may explaine why some TV shows are popular.
Honey Boo Boo ?
Regards Ernie

User avatar
circumspice
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Re: Shared human a Great White Shark DNA

Post by circumspice » Fri Feb 07, 2014 11:22 pm

Kinda old, but still interesting:

http://genecuisine.blogspot.com/2011/03 ... d.html?m=1


Friday, March 4, 2011

Michael Musso at 12:47 AM

Human DNA similarities to chimps and bananas, what does it mean?

When I was a child I remember hearing humans came from monkeys. I asked myself, "Then why are monkeys still around?" A valid question. The problem with the initial statement though is that we did not come from monkeys, but rather we share a common ancestor. When it comes to common ancestors and evolution, genetic sequencing has provided a great understanding.

I'm sure you've heard it before; humans and chimpanzees are about 98.8% similar. What does that really mean though? This number refers to comparing single nucleotide changes in the DNA, or changes in the sequence of the A,C,G,T code.

Comparing genetic duplications in genes, the number lowers to 96%. What's a duplication? As Even Eichler of University of Washington says, if we consider the genetic code as a book, entire pages will be repeated in one species but not the other. So conservatively, we are 96% alike with out closest cousin. Here's some other common animals and our genetic similarites (these numbers are consistent across all reliable sources):

Cat: 90%
Cow: 80%
Mouse: 75%
Fruit Fly: 60%
Banana: 50%

Interesting to look at. What I find most fascinating is the 50% match to bananas! Animal and plant life share so much ancient DNA coding from way back when plant and animal life diverged approximately 1.5 billion years ago.

The sequencing technology allowing for genetic comparison has been huge for anthropologists and evolutionary biologists. Anthropologists have used comparisons of genes between humans and our closest cousins to better understand when and how genetic variations occurred. Evolution was already well established before this technology existed with fossil records, embryology, comparisons of skeletal systems, study of vestigal appendages, and finally the understanding of the driver of evolution: natural selection. Genetic sequencing confirmed our understanding of species divergence and evolution, and also allowed scientists to better understand and build the the fascinating "tree of life."
"Damn with faint praise, assent with civil leer, and, without sneering, teach the rest to sneer." ~ Alexander Pope

dannan14
Posts: 481
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 2:47 pm

Re: Shared human a Great White Shark DNA

Post by dannan14 » Thu Apr 24, 2014 5:57 pm

kbs2244 wrote:
I am still researching the “sharks are a less cold-blooded fish” statement.
How can you be “less?” Isn’t it a binary thing?
White sharks are one of the few fishes that are regionally warm-bodied, which means that parts of its body – viscera, locomotor muscles and cranium – are kept at a higher temperature than the surrounding water. This characteristic is known as regional endothermy, and is associated with elevated metabolic rates compared to true cold-blooded bony fishes.
Read more at http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/11 ... 5zRjhZF.99
Apparently it's more complicated than yes or no. :)

Minimalist
Forum Moderator
Posts: 15685
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:09 pm
Location: Arizona

Re: Shared human a Great White Shark DNA

Post by Minimalist » Sun Apr 27, 2014 12:51 pm

Things usually are.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.

-- George Carlin

Post Reply