Repetitive DNA

 

In his very illuminating book Hen’s teeth and Horses Toes, Steven J Gould talks about the presumed functions of repetitive DNA. He states the notion amongst scientists that this DNA may represent viral DNA or ‘junk’ DNA.

Later on in his book is a very interesting passage about the special feet which have evolved amongst the dogs on the Galapagos islands where dogs have existed for a mere two hundred years. However, this has been enough time in evolutionary terms for dogs to evolve especially hard soles on their feet that can cope with sharp volcanic rock.

The mechanism of Natural Selection seems unlikely to be able to explain such fast evolutionary adaptation. There are no reports of dogs who did not survive due to their feet not being well adapted to running on volcanic rock. We may merely suppose that some dogs experienced less distress due to running on volcanic rock than others. This might have been due to some differences in the shape, size and texture of different dogs who escaped onto the island.

A crucial evolutionary factor in inheritance is the dominance of genes. Clearly, if thicker skin on the dogs feet were to have become dominant over thinner skin on dogs feet, then in just a few generations most dogs on the island would have had skin on their feet as thick as the thickest skin of any dog that had arrived there.

Still, this requires that the body is able to respond to chronic distress due to running on volcanic rock and make thick skin on the feet a dominant inheritable factor.

The question arises how the body is supposed to do just that. First of all, the body of the dogs would have had to be able to monitor chronic distress levels to its tissues. It is not hard to imagine that our bodies are able to do this. We call it an immune response. If tissue in our body is damaged the immune system repairs it. This is somehow connected to the lymph. The lymphatic system is an array of lymphatic knots connected via the lymphatic fluid which slowly (about two weeks) circulates the entire body between every cell. Thus every cell in the body has the ability to communicate with the lymph via the lymphatic fluid.  It seems likely that if cells are damaged distress signals are sent via this route. We may then suppose that one function of the lymph is to monitor the damage and repair of our body tissue.

However, what we are suggesting is that such immune responses might be passed on to the next generation by setting which genes are dominant.

In praxis this could mean that genes may come with a tag which indicates a preference by the body of a parent, i.e. ‘thicker skin! = less distress!’ or simply ‘more’ [skin]. We can experience on our own bodies how wear on our hands causes us to develop calluses which stop our skin from being damaged. Essentially, vulnerable spots on our hands grow thicker skin due to repetitive skin damage (blisters). The immune response is specific. Not all skin on our hands grows thick but merely those spots which develop blisters.

We may argue that all of our tissue grows because it is a response to some level of distress. When we grow as children, we grow in stages. This may be because as we grow in length our muscular system suddenly experiences distress because it needs to counterbalance too much leverage of the bones. If nutrition permits the easy growth of muscular tissue, the muscles soon catch up. As soon as distress levels in the body reduce below a certain limit the bones may use the surplus of available energy to grow further.

The whole growth process may be a coded chain of reactions designed to counter distress in one tissue caused by the growth of other tissue. Thus we may pass through the mechanical ‘memory’ of distress and adaptive growth of tissue of our entire evolution. Every time our ancestors have made an adaptation that has caused less distress in our tissue it has become dominant.

It is easy to see that if genes had a tag as mentioned above, if two parents were living under the same conditions, i.e. dogs running on sharp volcanic rock, both parents would be likely to have the same tag, and, as a consequence, the child would be born with it. Thus if one parent dog had thicker skin on their feet than the other, the tag ‘more’ would automatically select for the child to develop thicker skin on their feet from an embryonic stage giving dominance to the gene of the parent providing thicker skin.

If in the second generation both parents were born with such a tag and still encountered chronic distress due to running on volcanic rock another tag ‘more’ might have been added to the gene as it was passed on to their offspring.

Thus it is possible to imagine how in just very few generations the immune response of individual dogs on the Galapagos Islands caused a fundamental growth of relevant tissue in their offspring, so that today, dogs on the Galapagos Islands have especially evolved feet suitable for walking on volcanic rock.

 

It is therefore possible that immune responses stretch across generations until no more tags, caused by chronic distress to the tissue of a species in a particular habitat, are added to the genes passed on to their offspring.

 

This would be an evolutionary mechanism entirely different from that of Natural Selection. It is well documented that Natural Selection is a factor in the evolution of a species, but it may not be the only one.

 

The genes that have been decoded so far code for amino acids, the building blocks of our tissue. However, it is possible that Repetitive DNA codes for increases in the production of certain amino acids which in turn code for a particular part of our body. Thus Repetitive DNA could regulate body proportions.

 

This could explain why there is DNA which contains repetitive sequences and why this DNA exceeds by far the DNA that codes for amino acids.

 

It is also known that repetitive DNA changes during a person’s lifetime if that person suffers high levels of distress.

 

Aging may be due to the fact that in our lifetime we start running out of building blocks for making changes to our repetitive/proportions DNA. Embryonic DNA may be able to make such repairs due to high levels of building block DNA needed to create complex repetitive DNA structures.

It may also be that during our lifetime our Repetitive DNA structures get too complex and that as a consequence our immune responses slow down until our body is no longer able to maintain all tissue on low distress levels though adaptation and repair. As the distress level increases that causes an immune response from our body, so does the distress threshold which will trigger it. As a consequence our tissue shows signs of ageing.

It may be possible that the amount and type of genetic immune response in a person’s lifetime determines their longevity, a genetic immune response being one that deals with chronic distress levels in the body caused by lifestyle, such as tissue damages due to constant contact with toxic substances, sudden or incompatible changes in the type or amount of chronic distress.

Cancer may be an indication that the body is not able to make an adequate genetic immune response and therefore damaged tissue is allowed to reproduce. It is possible that if the hierarchies within Repetitive DNA were understood that in the case of cancer incoherence in the structure of Repetitive DNA hierarchies would be evident. Perhaps cancer is more likely to occur in people who suffer from constant high levels of distress to some part of their body, so that their body is in a constant need for repair. If this process was controlled by Repetitive DNA and if this DNA was damaged then perhaps this would result in serious damage and malignant growth of body tissue.

Certain viruses may cause cancer simply by causing high distress levels to certain body tissue that overstretch the capacity of the body for a genetic immune response.

The fact that clones do not live as long as their ‘parent’ may have to do with them not being equipped with the typical levels of Repetitive DNA building block material present in embryos of natural parents who were grown from special reproductive cells, naturally equipped with such vital genetic material, whereas a clone relies on whatever potentially depleted or over-structured genetic material was already present in the body cell from which it was cloned.

 

This is a wide field. However, I think it is possible to see how genetic immune responses may apply to many aspects of human health and how Repetitive DNA may have a vital role to play in human reproduction and as part of the human immune system.

 

The possibility of the existence of such an evolutionary genetic immune response has some far reaching consequences on how we should have to view certain events in our own evolution.

 

It is already obvious that sudden changes in climate would cause distress in many individuals.

It is possible to use this model of Generational Genetic Immune Responses to offer an explanation for the sudden disappearance of the Neanderthal features in people of the Northern Hemisphere. Archaic Homo sapiens look like an evolutionary step between Neanderthal people and certain modern Europeans. However, there are some distinct Neanderthal features that seem to disappear very suddenly in this supposed transition. Such features of the Neanderthal bones may be linked to the overall robustness of Neanderthal people and if Archaic Homo Sapiens were Neanderthal people who had lost their robustness then it seems that they had done so in a very short span of time (probably around a thousand years in any particular location).

It is not possible to attribute the disappearance of these features on changes in climate alone. Between fifty and thirty thousand years ago, wherever Archaic Homo Sapiens appear Neanderthal features seem to disappear for good.

There are some rare examples of fossil finds that display in between stages between Archaic and Neanderthal Homo Sapiens. For a long time mt-DNA Neanderthal finds led the scientific community to suppose that Neanderthal people were not related to modern humans. However, the latest research acknowledges our genetic links with these robust people. The debate no longer is whether or not we are related, but to which degree.

It is also not the first time Neanderthal features disappear for a few thousand years and then show up again when the climate changes into another Ice Age.

 

Since the mechanics of Natural Selection do not allow for a quick change of physical features it is not possible under such a model to assume that Neanderthal people turned into Archaic Homo sapiens in a time so short that hardly any substantial fossil evidence is ever likely to be found.

The mechanics of Natural Selection therefore dictate that there was a substantial immigration from other continents such as Africa and Asia into Europe.

Personally, I think it is very likely that such immigration occurred. However, the mechanics of Generational Genetic Immune Response allow for a different perspective on what happened.

When the Ice Age first started to be interrupted and the climate got significantly warmer a lot of the physical features of the classical Neanderthal built such as body heat containing stockiness would have caused these people physical distress, such as overheating. Other features may have included very pale (white) skin. In fact some scientists believe that red hair is a genetic Neanderthal feature that has survived to our time.

According to the Generational Genetic Immune Response these features would have caused people of pure Neanderthal descent chronic distress and other features that would have remedied this, such as increased slenderness, would have been genetically dominant. Therefore just a modest genetic connections with dark eyed and skinned people of a more slender built from Africa or Asia could have significantly altered the physical features of people in Europe since the classical Neanderthal features were Ice Age adaptations and the climate had changed.

However, the climate may not have been the only factor that helped to make Neanderthal features redundant. It may help not to think of Neanderthal people as a race or species but a culture; a culture which was designed to cope with Northern Hemisphere Ice Age conditions. Anyone who lived in that culture had to be robust or else they would have suffered or not lived. The Neanderthal culture may have used the mechanics of both Natural Selection and the Generational Genetic Immune Response to suppress genes that allowed for a more slender built in people of that culture.

It is well documented that life in that culture was physically very harsh by contemporary standards. It is also likely that when a warmer climate facilitated closer relationships with the people of Africa and Asia by freeing up the waterways leading to the Mediterranean, that through the resulting contact with more equatorial or tropical cultures, the culture and lifestyle in Europe was profoundly affected.

In the Middle East, Neanderthal and Archaic Homo Sapiens fossil finds exist almost side by side. The lifestyle of both groups was very similar when it came to hunting habits but varied in burial rites. It is quite possible that both fossil finds relate to people of the same culture who underwent times of significant immigration from Europe and then Africa. However, it is also possible that changes in climate at times gave alternating dominance to Neanderthal features and Archaic Homo Sapiens features, and that these climatic changes were accompanied by waves of migration. Thus, during a cold period people who still had retained Neanderthal Culture features felt comfortable to venture further south and during a warm period people from Africa with a slender built felt more comfortable to venture north.

I believe that the cave art in France and Spain indicates a link to a pre-10,000-years-ago-flood-Mediterranean-culture since where waterways leading to the Mediterranean or the Atlantic are absent, so is cave art. It also seems that cave art was a cultural import, although some of the cultural motives such as the bear cult or aurochs worship are well documented amongst people of the Neanderthal culture.

It may therefore have been possible that a profound change in climate and a modest genetic exchange with people who were better adapted to this new climate could have produces a profound and in geological terms sudden change in the appearance of the people whose direct ancestors had belonged to the Neanderthal Culture.

 

To conclude, I suggest that the model of a Generational Genetic Immune Response allows a more coherent image of the evolution of humanity not just as a race but also as a culture. Its mechanics can also provide an answer for the sudden evolution of specialised feet amongst dogs on the Galapagos Islands. It also allocates a function to Repetitive DNA which might help us towards a better understanding of how reproduction is linked with ancestral memory and human health.

 

I hope you have found this report interesting, if not helpful. If you have read it, I would be very happy about a single line of acknowledgement.

 

Kind regards,

 

Ivan Morf grote@ivanmorf.com