Is there logic in this sentence? “Authors discovered a gene as one of the genes evolved through natural selection”

Multi tool use
Multi tool use

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
6
down vote

favorite












From a news report:




PhD candidate Daiki Sato and Professor Masakado Kawata have discovered SLC18A1 (VMAT1), which encodes vesicular monoamine transporter 1, as one of the genes evolved through natural selection in the human lineage.




Didn't all genes evolve through natural selection?



I'm self-training myself in translation into Russian, and this sentence stumped me. How do I translate it and avoid an absurdity? I thought that all genes have evolved. That's what genetics is about, isn't it?






genetics terminology psychiatry







share|improve this question



















  • 1




    I think if you can read that sentence a bit differently and then it makes much more sense: if you put (more) emphasis on the last part [natural selection in the human lineage] it becomes clear that in this case we are talking about natural selection (or like iayrok clarified in his answer, positive selection) respective to the evolution of humans. And here obliviously not all genes are equally affected since, we share a lot with out animal ancestors.
    – Nicolai
    Sep 11 at 13:04














up vote
6
down vote

favorite












From a news report:




PhD candidate Daiki Sato and Professor Masakado Kawata have discovered SLC18A1 (VMAT1), which encodes vesicular monoamine transporter 1, as one of the genes evolved through natural selection in the human lineage.




Didn't all genes evolve through natural selection?



I'm self-training myself in translation into Russian, and this sentence stumped me. How do I translate it and avoid an absurdity? I thought that all genes have evolved. That's what genetics is about, isn't it?






genetics terminology psychiatry







share|improve this question



















  • 1




    I think if you can read that sentence a bit differently and then it makes much more sense: if you put (more) emphasis on the last part [natural selection in the human lineage] it becomes clear that in this case we are talking about natural selection (or like iayrok clarified in his answer, positive selection) respective to the evolution of humans. And here obliviously not all genes are equally affected since, we share a lot with out animal ancestors.
    – Nicolai
    Sep 11 at 13:04












up vote
6
down vote

favorite









up vote
6
down vote

favorite











From a news report:




PhD candidate Daiki Sato and Professor Masakado Kawata have discovered SLC18A1 (VMAT1), which encodes vesicular monoamine transporter 1, as one of the genes evolved through natural selection in the human lineage.




Didn't all genes evolve through natural selection?



I'm self-training myself in translation into Russian, and this sentence stumped me. How do I translate it and avoid an absurdity? I thought that all genes have evolved. That's what genetics is about, isn't it?






genetics terminology psychiatry







share|improve this question















From a news report:




PhD candidate Daiki Sato and Professor Masakado Kawata have discovered SLC18A1 (VMAT1), which encodes vesicular monoamine transporter 1, as one of the genes evolved through natural selection in the human lineage.




Didn't all genes evolve through natural selection?



I'm self-training myself in translation into Russian, and this sentence stumped me. How do I translate it and avoid an absurdity? I thought that all genes have evolved. That's what genetics is about, isn't it?






genetics terminology psychiatry




genetics terminology psychiatry






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Sep 10 at 16:44









BlackThorn

1033




1033










asked Sep 10 at 8:44









CopperKettle

627618




627618







  • 1




    I think if you can read that sentence a bit differently and then it makes much more sense: if you put (more) emphasis on the last part [natural selection in the human lineage] it becomes clear that in this case we are talking about natural selection (or like iayrok clarified in his answer, positive selection) respective to the evolution of humans. And here obliviously not all genes are equally affected since, we share a lot with out animal ancestors.
    – Nicolai
    Sep 11 at 13:04












  • 1




    I think if you can read that sentence a bit differently and then it makes much more sense: if you put (more) emphasis on the last part [natural selection in the human lineage] it becomes clear that in this case we are talking about natural selection (or like iayrok clarified in his answer, positive selection) respective to the evolution of humans. And here obliviously not all genes are equally affected since, we share a lot with out animal ancestors.
    – Nicolai
    Sep 11 at 13:04







1




1




I think if you can read that sentence a bit differently and then it makes much more sense: if you put (more) emphasis on the last part [natural selection in the human lineage] it becomes clear that in this case we are talking about natural selection (or like iayrok clarified in his answer, positive selection) respective to the evolution of humans. And here obliviously not all genes are equally affected since, we share a lot with out animal ancestors.
– Nicolai
Sep 11 at 13:04




I think if you can read that sentence a bit differently and then it makes much more sense: if you put (more) emphasis on the last part [natural selection in the human lineage] it becomes clear that in this case we are talking about natural selection (or like iayrok clarified in his answer, positive selection) respective to the evolution of humans. And here obliviously not all genes are equally affected since, we share a lot with out animal ancestors.
– Nicolai
Sep 11 at 13:04










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
8
down vote



accepted










Yes, the statement in the news article is not correct; however, it (probably accidentally) isn't quite as nonsensical as it sounds.



The actual paper that the news article is trying to describe is unsurprisingly more accurate.




Here, we found a gene, SLC18A1 (VMAT1: Vesicular monoamine transporter 1), as a positively selected gene in the human lineage. This gene has a human‐unique variant (Thr136Ile; different from other mammals (136Asn)) whose association with several psychotic symptoms has been repeatedly indicated. Moreover, our analysis showed that this variant has been maintained in non‐African populations by balancing selection and had originated around 100,000 years ago, typically regarded as the timing of Out‐of‐Africa migration.




--Positive and balancing selection on SLC18A1 gene associated with psychiatric disorders and human‐unique personality traits



Here instead of talking about "natural selection", the authors refer to "positive selection" and "balancing selection", two sub-categories of natural selection. Since much of the genome is under negative selection, it's worth noting alleles that are not.




Didn't all genes evolve through natural selection?




The reason the news article is not nonsensical is that natural selection is not the only force that acts on genomes. We've known for 50 years that drift is an important factor that influences genetic evolution (wikipedia: Neutral theory of molecular evolution, Nearly neutral theory of molecular evolution). However, it's pretty clear from the article that the author is unaware of these concepts and probably doesn't understand the significance of the paper.






share|improve this answer
















  • 6




    Every time I see how badly journalists misunderstand the scientific news they report on, I wonder how accurate is their understanding of, e.g., the political news they report on.
    – David Richerby
    Sep 10 at 14:21






  • 2




    @DavidRicherby "Gell-Mann amnesia"
    – chrylis
    Sep 10 at 15:25










Your Answer




StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "375"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: false,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













 

draft saved


draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbiology.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f77265%2fis-there-logic-in-this-sentence-authors-discovered-a-gene-as-one-of-the-genes%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest

















1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes








up vote
8
down vote



accepted










Yes, the statement in the news article is not correct; however, it (probably accidentally) isn't quite as nonsensical as it sounds.



The actual paper that the news article is trying to describe is unsurprisingly more accurate.




Here, we found a gene, SLC18A1 (VMAT1: Vesicular monoamine transporter 1), as a positively selected gene in the human lineage. This gene has a human‐unique variant (Thr136Ile; different from other mammals (136Asn)) whose association with several psychotic symptoms has been repeatedly indicated. Moreover, our analysis showed that this variant has been maintained in non‐African populations by balancing selection and had originated around 100,000 years ago, typically regarded as the timing of Out‐of‐Africa migration.




--Positive and balancing selection on SLC18A1 gene associated with psychiatric disorders and human‐unique personality traits



Here instead of talking about "natural selection", the authors refer to "positive selection" and "balancing selection", two sub-categories of natural selection. Since much of the genome is under negative selection, it's worth noting alleles that are not.




Didn't all genes evolve through natural selection?




The reason the news article is not nonsensical is that natural selection is not the only force that acts on genomes. We've known for 50 years that drift is an important factor that influences genetic evolution (wikipedia: Neutral theory of molecular evolution, Nearly neutral theory of molecular evolution). However, it's pretty clear from the article that the author is unaware of these concepts and probably doesn't understand the significance of the paper.






share|improve this answer
















  • 6




    Every time I see how badly journalists misunderstand the scientific news they report on, I wonder how accurate is their understanding of, e.g., the political news they report on.
    – David Richerby
    Sep 10 at 14:21






  • 2




    @DavidRicherby "Gell-Mann amnesia"
    – chrylis
    Sep 10 at 15:25














up vote
8
down vote



accepted










Yes, the statement in the news article is not correct; however, it (probably accidentally) isn't quite as nonsensical as it sounds.



The actual paper that the news article is trying to describe is unsurprisingly more accurate.




Here, we found a gene, SLC18A1 (VMAT1: Vesicular monoamine transporter 1), as a positively selected gene in the human lineage. This gene has a human‐unique variant (Thr136Ile; different from other mammals (136Asn)) whose association with several psychotic symptoms has been repeatedly indicated. Moreover, our analysis showed that this variant has been maintained in non‐African populations by balancing selection and had originated around 100,000 years ago, typically regarded as the timing of Out‐of‐Africa migration.




--Positive and balancing selection on SLC18A1 gene associated with psychiatric disorders and human‐unique personality traits



Here instead of talking about "natural selection", the authors refer to "positive selection" and "balancing selection", two sub-categories of natural selection. Since much of the genome is under negative selection, it's worth noting alleles that are not.




Didn't all genes evolve through natural selection?




The reason the news article is not nonsensical is that natural selection is not the only force that acts on genomes. We've known for 50 years that drift is an important factor that influences genetic evolution (wikipedia: Neutral theory of molecular evolution, Nearly neutral theory of molecular evolution). However, it's pretty clear from the article that the author is unaware of these concepts and probably doesn't understand the significance of the paper.






share|improve this answer
















  • 6




    Every time I see how badly journalists misunderstand the scientific news they report on, I wonder how accurate is their understanding of, e.g., the political news they report on.
    – David Richerby
    Sep 10 at 14:21






  • 2




    @DavidRicherby "Gell-Mann amnesia"
    – chrylis
    Sep 10 at 15:25












up vote
8
down vote



accepted







up vote
8
down vote



accepted






Yes, the statement in the news article is not correct; however, it (probably accidentally) isn't quite as nonsensical as it sounds.



The actual paper that the news article is trying to describe is unsurprisingly more accurate.




Here, we found a gene, SLC18A1 (VMAT1: Vesicular monoamine transporter 1), as a positively selected gene in the human lineage. This gene has a human‐unique variant (Thr136Ile; different from other mammals (136Asn)) whose association with several psychotic symptoms has been repeatedly indicated. Moreover, our analysis showed that this variant has been maintained in non‐African populations by balancing selection and had originated around 100,000 years ago, typically regarded as the timing of Out‐of‐Africa migration.




--Positive and balancing selection on SLC18A1 gene associated with psychiatric disorders and human‐unique personality traits



Here instead of talking about "natural selection", the authors refer to "positive selection" and "balancing selection", two sub-categories of natural selection. Since much of the genome is under negative selection, it's worth noting alleles that are not.




Didn't all genes evolve through natural selection?




The reason the news article is not nonsensical is that natural selection is not the only force that acts on genomes. We've known for 50 years that drift is an important factor that influences genetic evolution (wikipedia: Neutral theory of molecular evolution, Nearly neutral theory of molecular evolution). However, it's pretty clear from the article that the author is unaware of these concepts and probably doesn't understand the significance of the paper.






share|improve this answer












Yes, the statement in the news article is not correct; however, it (probably accidentally) isn't quite as nonsensical as it sounds.



The actual paper that the news article is trying to describe is unsurprisingly more accurate.




Here, we found a gene, SLC18A1 (VMAT1: Vesicular monoamine transporter 1), as a positively selected gene in the human lineage. This gene has a human‐unique variant (Thr136Ile; different from other mammals (136Asn)) whose association with several psychotic symptoms has been repeatedly indicated. Moreover, our analysis showed that this variant has been maintained in non‐African populations by balancing selection and had originated around 100,000 years ago, typically regarded as the timing of Out‐of‐Africa migration.




--Positive and balancing selection on SLC18A1 gene associated with psychiatric disorders and human‐unique personality traits



Here instead of talking about "natural selection", the authors refer to "positive selection" and "balancing selection", two sub-categories of natural selection. Since much of the genome is under negative selection, it's worth noting alleles that are not.




Didn't all genes evolve through natural selection?




The reason the news article is not nonsensical is that natural selection is not the only force that acts on genomes. We've known for 50 years that drift is an important factor that influences genetic evolution (wikipedia: Neutral theory of molecular evolution, Nearly neutral theory of molecular evolution). However, it's pretty clear from the article that the author is unaware of these concepts and probably doesn't understand the significance of the paper.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Sep 10 at 12:06









iayork

9,23211836




9,23211836







  • 6




    Every time I see how badly journalists misunderstand the scientific news they report on, I wonder how accurate is their understanding of, e.g., the political news they report on.
    – David Richerby
    Sep 10 at 14:21






  • 2




    @DavidRicherby "Gell-Mann amnesia"
    – chrylis
    Sep 10 at 15:25












  • 6




    Every time I see how badly journalists misunderstand the scientific news they report on, I wonder how accurate is their understanding of, e.g., the political news they report on.
    – David Richerby
    Sep 10 at 14:21






  • 2




    @DavidRicherby "Gell-Mann amnesia"
    – chrylis
    Sep 10 at 15:25







6




6




Every time I see how badly journalists misunderstand the scientific news they report on, I wonder how accurate is their understanding of, e.g., the political news they report on.
– David Richerby
Sep 10 at 14:21




Every time I see how badly journalists misunderstand the scientific news they report on, I wonder how accurate is their understanding of, e.g., the political news they report on.
– David Richerby
Sep 10 at 14:21




2




2




@DavidRicherby "Gell-Mann amnesia"
– chrylis
Sep 10 at 15:25




@DavidRicherby "Gell-Mann amnesia"
– chrylis
Sep 10 at 15:25

















 

draft saved


draft discarded















































 


draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbiology.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f77265%2fis-there-logic-in-this-sentence-authors-discovered-a-gene-as-one-of-the-genes%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest
































































IN1GB,ScW,qYc,FGdIQvp48Kv1l9ufgJk67Jvur,s5EO q n A h4vf6GC r,2i,ro,KSla
-
8LFEces,jlLJQ2CQA618guPn JKUFhjGwIF8L9CegpyMaln17,MoZMCEw4Q0,7TS4s90MjwGSSAeS 93

這個網誌中的熱門文章

How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

圖片
Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 2 down vote favorite My aim is to smooth the terrain in a video game. Therefore I contrived an algorithm that makes use of Bézier curves of different orders. But this algorithm is defined in a two dimensional space for now. To shift it into the third dimension I need to somehow combine the Bézier curves. Given two curves in each two dimensions, how can I combine them to build a surface? I thought about something like a curve of a curve. Or maybe I could multiply them somehow. How can I combine them to cause the wanted behavior? Is there a common approach? In the image you can see the input, on the left, and the output, on the right, of the algorithm that works in a two dimensional space. For the real application there is a three dimensional input. The algorithm relays only on the adjacent tiles. Given these it will define the control points of the mentioned Bézier cur...
閱讀完整內容

Propositional logic and tautologies

圖片
Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 0 down vote favorite Taken from P. Suppes "Introduction to logic" pp16 Starting from the sentence "If $P$ tautologically implies $Q$, then.." Question: Is it true that, at least within propositional logic, we are able to prove only tautologies or do I mis-understand something? If yes, is propositional logic special in some way? Is the notion of tautology meaningful only in propositional logic? logic propositional-calculus share | cite | improve this question edited Nov 29 '17 at 18:53 Mauro ALLEGRANZA 60.8k 4 46 105 asked Nov 29 '17 at 16:32 Alvin Lepik 2,448 9 20 add a comment  |  up vote 0 down vote favorite Taken from P. Suppes "Introduction to logic" pp16 Starting from the sentence "If $P$ tautologically implies $Q$, then.." Question: Is it true that, at least within propositional logic, we are able to prove only tautologi...
閱讀完整內容

Distribution of Stopped Wiener Process with Stochastic Volatility

圖片
Clash Royale CLAN TAG #URR8PPP up vote 0 down vote favorite Let $(W_s)_s geq 0$ be a Wiener process and $tau$ be a random variable with an exponential distribution with parameter $lambda$. Suppose that $W$ and $tau$ are independent. In this question, we see that the distribution of the stopped Wiener process $W_tau$ corresponds to a Laplace distribution with scale parameter $fracsigmasqrt2lambda$ where $sigma$ is the instantaneous variance of the Wiener process. Suppose now, that the variance $sigma^2$ also follows a stochastic process such that we have: $$dS = sigma SdW_s \ dsigma^2 = alphasigma^2dt + xisigma^2dW_sigma$$ where $alpha$ and $xi$ are independent of $S$ and $dW_s$ and $dW_sigma$ are independent Wiener processes. My aim is to derive the distribution of $log S_tau$. First, if $barV_T$ denotes the mean variance over some time interval $[0,T]$ defined by $$barV_T = frac1T intlimits_0^Tsigma^2(t)dt,$$ it is easy to show (Lemma of Îto) that $$...
閱讀完整內容