Neutral Evolution - Revision history

DavidB4-bot: /* top */clean up & uniformity

2016-07-13T16:34:42Z

top: clean up & uniformity

Jallen: Neutral evolution moved to Neutral Evolution: MOS

2007-10-23T15:58:46Z

Neutral evolution moved to Neutral Evolution: MOS

Jallen at 15:58, October 23, 2007

2007-10-23T15:58:12Z

Aziraphale: categorize

2007-08-01T15:47:58Z

categorize

Tims: New page: The Neutral theory of molecular evolution suggests that most of the genetic variation in populations is the result of mutation and genetic drift and not selection. Basically, the theory ...

2007-04-23T12:51:40Z

New page: The Neutral theory of molecular evolution suggests that most of the genetic variation in populations is the result of mutation and genetic drift and not selection. Basically, the theory ...

New page

The Neutral theory of molecular evolution suggests that most of the genetic variation in populations is the result of mutation and genetic drift and not selection.

Basically, the theory suggests that if a population carries several different versions of a gene, odds are that each of those versions is equally good at performing its job—in other words, that variation is neutral: whether you carry gene version A or gene version B does not affect your fitness.

The neutral theory is easily misinterpreted. It does NOT suggest:

:#That organisms are not adapted to their environments
:#That all morphological variation is neutral
:#That ALL genetic variation is neutral
:#That natural selection is unimportant in shaping genomes

The main point of the neutral theory is simply that when we see several versions of a gene in a population, it is likely that their frequencies are simply drifting around. The data supporting and refuting the neutral theory are complicated. Figuring out how widely the neutral theory applies is still the topic of much research.

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 The main point of the neutral theory is simply that when we see several versions of a gene in a population, it is likely that their frequencies are simply drifting around. The data supporting and refuting the neutral theory are complicated. Figuring out how widely the neutral theory applies is still the topic of much research.
-[[category:evolution]]
+[[Category:Evolution]]
-[[category:genetics]]
+[[Category:Genetics]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:47, August 1, 2007
Line 11:		Line 11:

	The main point of the neutral theory is simply that when we see several versions of a gene in a population, it is likely that their frequencies are simply drifting around. The data supporting and refuting the neutral theory are complicated. Figuring out how widely the neutral theory applies is still the topic of much research.		The main point of the neutral theory is simply that when we see several versions of a gene in a population, it is likely that their frequencies are simply drifting around. The data supporting and refuting the neutral theory are complicated. Figuring out how widely the neutral theory applies is still the topic of much research.
		+
		+	[[category:evolution]]
		+	[[category:genetics]]

← Older revision	Revision as of 15:58, October 23, 2007
(No difference)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-The Neutral theory of molecular evolution suggests that most of the genetic variation in populations is the result of mutation and genetic drift and not selection.
+The '''neutral theory of molecular evolution''' suggests that most of the genetic variation in populations is the result of mutation and genetic drift and not selection.
-Basically, the theory suggests that if a population carries several different versions of a gene, odds are that each of those versions is equally good at performing its job—in other words, that variation is neutral: whether you carry gene version A or gene version B does not affect your fitness.
+Basically, the theory suggests that if a population carries several different versions of a [[gene]], odds are that each of those versions is equally good at performing its job—in other words, that variation is neutral: whether you carry gene version A or gene version B does not affect your fitness.
 The neutral theory is easily misinterpreted. It does NOT suggest:
@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 :#That all morphological variation is neutral
 :#That ALL genetic variation is neutral
-:#That natural selection is unimportant in shaping genomes
+:#That [[natural selection]] is unimportant in shaping genomes
 The main point of the neutral theory is simply that when we see several versions of a gene in a population, it is likely that their frequencies are simply drifting around. The data supporting and refuting the neutral theory are complicated. Figuring out how widely the neutral theory applies is still the topic of much research.