An elegantly intuitive view of evolution

To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/NanoRooms . You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.
My Patreon: patreon.com/NanoRooms
Books & Papers:
www.cell.com/abstract/S0092-8...
www.pnas.org/doi/abs/10.1073/...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...
www.tau.ac.il/~itaymay/papers...
www.nature.com/scitable/topic...
journals.plos.org/plosone/arti...
link.springer.com/chapter/10....
Special thanks to ‪@BradyJohnston‬ for the animations library
Download it at: bradyajohnston.github.io/Mole...

[@Nanorooms]

To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/NanoRooms . You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.

[@gregorysagegreene]

Just one thing ... are you hinting at all that 'junk DNA' we have is perhaps there for the next speciation event(s)? - Very good video, btw. 💜👍

[@user-co6xl8vo5y]

The researchers missed a golden opportunity to find out what snake legs look like

[@Soken50]

Right? I wanted to see that!

[@Lilbluepenguin]

Though I think it would be kind of hard to ask a funding body like NSF “hey can you give us money so we can give this snake legs” 😂😂

[@Soken50]

@@Lilbluepenguin You'd obviously have to rephrase that in scientific terms and dazzle them with amazing applications like fixing malformations in human fetuses in the future.

[@BartdeBoisblanc]

They could compare the genes of a snake to a legless lizard,might reveal something.

[@user-co6xl8vo5y]

@@BartdeBoisblanc Not the same, it just wouldn't be enough of an abomination.

[@Nanorooms]

Nah, I’d evolve

[@phiality9070]

I alone am the evolving one.

[@Dr.Kraig_Ren]

When I read my old messages I cringe out. So I evolve every two months

[@degariuslozak2169]

OOOOOOOOOOOOHHH!!!🔥🔥🔥

[@wasordx3245]

Stand proud, you have evolved, but nah I'd be more fit

[@MajorLeeAwesome]

Throughout space and soup, I alone am the Primal One.

[@cristopherpuga1637]

Physicist here. I'm about to apply to grad school by the end of the year, and you might be the reason I can't stop thinking about applying to biophysics. Great content!

[@Nanorooms]

I’m two years away from that. Lmk how gradschool goes!

[@NamedSoni]

And here I am learning CS and bio. Hope this becomes relevant in future industry.

[@cyberbiosecurity]

@@NamedSoni Amazing choice!

[@fyang1429]

I am studying structural bio and I’d say don’t- it’s a terrible field with insane work hours and whether you publish depends almost entirely on luck

[@firecracker26241]

Biophysicist in grad school here. Do it!

[@spliter88]

One thing I noticed in my own evolution experiments is that natural disasters are a necessary part of evolution and diversification. If all you have is limited food and evolve organisms they'll just end up more and more efficient, but very similar behaviours, and very, very rarely you'll end up with a version that changes things around. However if you introduce periodic disasters that randomly kill off big chunks of population then you'll quickly end up with much more diverse ecosystems. I suspect that's because of bacteria getting stuck on local maxima. Once they reach it, then any genetic deviation away from that will necessarily reduce their fitness and become quickly outcompeted by those that end up closer to the local maxima. Random natural disasters create a temporary opportunity where reduction of fitness isn't a death sentence and you have a few dozen to hundred generations where you're able to experiment pathways that require the bacteria to become less fit but without having to start over from a random genotype. Then a new maxima is often found and the old maxima becomes just a specialized niche.

[@ratvomit874]

The crazy thing is that this isn't even limited to biological evolution, we see the same thing in technological advancement as well. It's quite possible that bicycles only came into existence because of the 1816 Year Without a Summer which decimated horse populations worldwide and forced people to look for alternative means of transportation. If that never happened it's entirely possible we might still be stuck with horses to this day (remember that development of mechanical propulsion drivetrains for automobiles and paved roads was really first done for the bicycle, there's a reason the modern car came so soon after the bicycle)

[@bluemonstrosity259]

Correct and profound comment. Much appreciated.

[@szymonbaranowski8184]

not this way, evolution improves when ecosystem grows and it grows with overall stability and size, mass dying off also causes fall of diversity... coming of cellulose itself caused massive changes in ecosystems without mass dying

[@theapexsurvivor9538]

Makes sense as evolution is driven by niche competition. If there's only one niche and it's being equally competed for, the only way to evolve is to be more efficient. However if there's fluctuations in that niche, or multiple close niches that can be competed for, it allows more opportunities for something less efficient in the initial niche to develop.

[@bradbradford8576]

Everyone's understanding of evolution is incomplete, but still, thanks for making that slightly less so

[@shir_azazil]

if you can make mice amputee by giving them snake ZRS, does that mean you can give snakes their legs back by giving them mice ZRS?

[@sobbski2672]

Probably not since ZRS is part of a network of genes. Although disabling the ZRS gene disrupts limb growth, restoring it in snakes wouldn't necessarily make them grow legs again.

[@travcollier]

​@@sobbski2672Though it would be interesting to see what other genes in the 'make legs' pathway were co-opted for novel functions after they lost their primary function.

[@bounceday]

Maybe

[@CandideSchmyles]

Millipede leg growth genes would be cool

[@PierreLucSex]

@@CandideSchmyles yeah, let's test it on your children first

[@vipierozan99]

So basically, feature flags?

[@mikemhz]

Or backwards compatability

[@rockapedra1130]

This video has really excellent content but IMHO, it needs to be slowed down, filled in and expanded. Maybe even broken into a several videos? It's a bit like super speed Cliffs Notes as it is! Keep up the good work!

[@rybzym.m790]

I do agree it is fast, but I don't think it should be different videos IMO, I think it should be 20 mins and with a bit more explanations on some of the diagrams. I get a vibe of 3Blue1Brown from this video, but it lacks the basics that 3B1B sometimes gives in maths, and I believe here in biology it can really be useful of course with his fingerprint containing the whole video. Maybe add the extra details and some of the resources in Patreon? In any case I wish for this channel to grow much more as youtube doesn't have a lot of deep Biology channel, my first thought would be the thought emporium but they do more of experiments, not really illustrations on how the basic mechanisms of Biology work. Anyhow!, this is my small opinion as a science youtube binge watcher! Best of luck Nano!

[@KWifler]

It's a good speed for modern young people. It's about average for most of the videos I watch, anyways. Although, whenever I try to show a video to a boomer, they get confused, LOL

[@pizzainc.1465]

Modern young people? Boomer? lol in all caps as a conclusion? Sus 🧐, are you sure you are not the boomer? Nobody talks like that, especially not on scientific KZbin channels

[@rockapedra1130]

@@rybzym.m790 good ideas!

[@rockapedra1130]

@@KWifler I was trying to say that it would be more educational if it had a more controlled pacing and a longer exposition. This attitude of name calling and believing your cohort is sooooo advanced is just your immaturity showing.

[@perrywilliams5407]

What a great presentation! The one thing that continues to "anthropomorphize" the process of evolution (it is used in every explanation I've ever seen, including here) is describing a genetic variation being "selected." That may have a very specific meaning within evolutionary science, but to a layman, it sounds like agency. Randomized processes have no agency; they do not act out of volition because a process does not have a will. May I suggest as an alternative to describe selection as the result of probabilistic math? A fitter variant has a statistical advantage over time, sort of like playing with loaded dice. You cover that quite well latter on, and kudos for doing so, but it is more technical and so less accessible for regular folks.

[@dantefernandez2455]

Excellent video and the animations are impeccable supplementary learning tools! As a BioChemE student I would love to see more videos that go into depth when it comes to specific mechanisms. For instance, 7:50 could have been an entire video: 1.) You could explain the active site's original purpose and go into the residue interactions and the step by step mechanistic process. 2a.) Explain the specific proteins/processes involved with duplicating a section of a genome. 2b.) Explain how both copies of the gene would share the same promotor region (I assume). 3a.) Go into the roll introns and exons play (idk if that protein you showed even came from a eukaryote, so ignore if not applicable) in sometimes splicing out the duplication to retain original function in some cells and have other cells not splice the copy and how that would allow that copy to evolve a unique function over time. 3b.) Go into the residues that facilitate the dimerization. 4.) Extrapolate from the previous points how complex and modular quaternary structures and metabolic pathway can come out of this to evolve from a single cell to a tree, mushroom, or even a human over time! I don't know what your analytics say but I feel like tons of people are starved for long form content. Don't be afraid to go into excruciating detail, we're a curious bunch!

[@sobbski2672]

Keep it up man. Im starting my doctoral program this summer; your videos are excellent! What do you use to create your biomolecular videos, PyMOL?

[@Nanorooms]

The blender add-on I linked below

[@GenomeNinjaScience]

Hi @NanoRooms! Your content is awesome. I find it engaging and informative! 💛I also really like the animations you use in your video. I was curious, What software do you use to make them? Is this a question you can answer? Thank you for any time and attention that is provided to this comment!

[@KevinWang-jc1bx]

Thank you for another marvelously polished video! Just recently found your channel and can't stop myself from watching all of your systems biology videos. From your mathematical and systems biology background, what are your thoughts on how the mathematical basis for biological processes fits into the evolutionary model? Do you think these mathematical properties are coincidentally emergent, guide evolution, or something else?

[@Nanorooms]

I’m still currently a novice on the subject. I’ve only recently learned of such a thing in more detail from my friend who I credited at the end of the video. I might make a video on that topic sooner or later. But in general, it’s pretty gosh darn fascinating. He was even able to model how microbes can evolve together in a community!

[@1Cr0w]

"It's not just mutation" Look inside. It's just mutation.

[@GustavoOliveira-gp6nr]

The content is very good and the animations as well, but the speed is a little to fast for me. I am not familiar with some biological terms and the dna and genes pictured and you skip it too fast and i dont get it sometimes. Also, I may have gotten it wrong but the way I see it you made some big claims and questions in the beggining of the video but it was not clear to me what are the objective answers, you said just mutations dont explain the variety we observe in evolution but in my eyes you just explained more ways of mutations, so i was left wondering what were the answers you promised in the beggining. It would be very helpful if you could provide a clear summary of the points you are making in the end of the video.

[@user-nd7rg5er5g]

Completely fascinating and wonderful work. Thank you for teaching us in such clear and fantastic ways!

[@Scarybug]

This is really great! Please do consider adding captions in your future videos. It makes them much more accessible and KZbin's auto captions are terrible.

[@briace9939]

Literally using youtube auto captions and they are working fine

[@Scarybug]

@@briace9939 if you don't care about getting all the words right sure

[@the_real_aristotle]

U can try your phones auto caption

[@Scarybug]

@@the_real_aristotle Auto caption are always terrible for science videos because they don't understand rare words very well. They also don't handle non American or British accents very well. They also don't punctuate properly. Providing hand made captions means people who can't hear well and people with auditory processing issues have a much better time understanding your content. KZbin provides creators with tools to edit the auto captions into something that is actually correct.

[@sol-splendet]

man this is straight up gold. The animation and the commentary are top notch, keep it up my guy :)

[@eduardschreder1623]

thanks for putting all the paper links in the description

[@Nanorooms]

Would be unethical if I didn’t haha

[@snipergaming2639]

@@Nanorooms Hey, these are really great videos. Could you tell me how they're edited and what you use to animate them? I'm thinking of doing a similar thing in the future> Not copying though hahha

[@hiryu70]

Title: its not just mutation Video: it's just mutation

[@lastchance8142]

THANK YOU! I guess nobody else noticed.

[@szymonbaranowski8184]

it's random divergence but also memory of organisms of variations that didn't work and it's not in DNA kek

[@omenow]

3:50

[@wpwscience4027]

Also worth noting that fitness itself is not a uniform cull. You have quite literally as many different advantageous trajectories as you can fit under the sun.

[@vinniepeterss]

awesome video mate!

[@JoeTaber]

It turns out repair rate is is not homogeneous. That is, some genes are repaired with near 100% accuracy, while other genes are allowed to have errors. "‘DNA spellchecker’ is preferentially directed towards more important parts of chromosomes that contain key genes." - Center for Genomic Regulation article *Differential DNA mismatch repair underlies mutation rate variation across the human genome* - DOI: 10.1038/nature14173

[@Angelmou]

Some lineages of life also have less efficient DNA repair mechanism. Squids are a good example for that.

[@cyberbiosecurity]

Amazing video, thank you

[@gregorysagegreene]

I've been exploring a number of areas of biology, and become familiar with a lot. But this is a new and intriguing area for me, that I'm not able to fully grasp yet, and definitely want to delve further into.

[@psi9899]

Thank you for the great video! This is also why transposons and integrated viral elements in the genome are also drivers of trait evolution!

[@Nanorooms]

Indeed! A little sad that I couldn’t manage to find a place to fit it in this video without overblowing the complexity.

[@CzechNeight]

I've been waiting 20 years for this video! I've been waiting for someone to unpack the oversimplification of oopsies. As someone who is not focused on biology, it was still intuitive that mutations and natural selection were not enough to see the accelerating explosion of diversity of life. If DNA copy errors were the whole mechanism, why is it that we were single celled for billions of years, but then all mammals evolve in 200 million years. I see now that it is indeed just 'oopsies all the way down', but it's oopsies at different levels of duplication, and that a gene level duplication oopsie gives the 'problem child' gene time to find its real passion in life. And you allude to some amount of a larger library of genes available over time, which I thought might be part of it. Thank you for more clearly telling this story!

[@Nanorooms]

If I may ask, what background do you come from?

[@KillianTwew]

Could you hijack a duplication event to sort of seed it to develop a trait you want, or could you just code and insert said trait?

[@davidaugustofc2574]

Some viruses just insert DNA into the cells.

[@someguy999]

Duplication events are random and rare, so it probably wouldn't make sense to try and hijack one. It would make more sense just to use a gene editing technology like CRISPR to do what you are describing.

[@vinniepeterss]

love this as always!

[@aaaaa-oh6dk]

Excellent animation and editing, love to see it!

[@michaelscheibe4228]

The Videos are a good source for modeling protein dynamics/regulation in cells and between them. I have bought the book "An Inteoduction to Systems Biology" (2. Edition), but I'm at the beginning & the real interest i am about to is modeling the evolving of DNA & RNA.

[@InforSpirit]

I think one of the most underspoken thing is horizontal gene transfer events. Endosymbiotic transfer, where some reason smaller cell organism got trapped inside of bigger cell (plastids like chloroplast, mitocondria) Viral DNA transfer: Immunology supressing gene transfer maybe is behind of mammal blacenta evolution. Bacteria, funcal gene transfers to animals (more common with smaller species). Not to even mention multicellural ecosystem symbiots. Human gut and skin has so many beneficial bacterials that are not part of human genome adn have effect on fittness.

[@mrv4747]

This is golden content!

[@adriaancanter4573]

I've read that Drosophila experiments show that they evolve to adapt to heat stress faster than what can be explained by random mutation alone. I've never understood if that's really true or how. If true would the mechanisms you've described account for such an observation?

[@ThatSpazamataz]

It’s possible that these are the result of epigenetic changes. I’d have to see the study you are talking about to confirm it though. It’s also the case that mutation isn’t always random. Gene transfer can be directed just as we humans can make GMO’s so can some organisms in some conditions edit their own or other organisms genes. (Viruses are the most obvious example of this, but CRISPR is the best example). So this could’ve another possibility.

[@robertomancusi7929]

This video is amazing! Keep it up

[@yeethappymeta]

i love this video so much!!! I can only wish to become such a great scientific educator as yourself.

[@MichaelVelasquez-dx5mr]

“ you are a project of a fortunate series of mistakes over billions of years… so don’t be a afraid to make them “ - Sage

[@Gutterrat69]

Thankyou this was very helpful and cleared up my misconception

[@andrewgu2318]

Wow im here early. I love your content man.

[@calebr7199]

Another great video from one of my favorite science youtubers!

[@rasiklal8016]

One of the BEST explanations on youtube - THANKS

[@MegaMieb]

Poor snakes. No sonic hedgehog, no limbs

[@GeoffryGifari]

How can the DNA copier "know" what the right DNA sequence is? shouldn't there be a reference?

[@cryptoam177]

The reference strand is the other complementary strand. When the DNA synthase enzyme (the copier) is creating the "copy" strand, it uses the complementary template strand to match the correct bases to form said copy strand. Of course, errors can happen due to a bunch of various factors(such as just accidentally use the wrong base, damage to bases causing them to appear chemically similar to other bases, bases in the complementary strand not "shown" to the enzyme due to kinks(DNA is a physical molecule that can bend and twist), and many other factors).

[@Gelatinocyte2]

DNA replication is really just like solving the simplest jigsaw puzzle - each base can only fit/pair with its complementary base; but reality is never perfect, that's why mutations still occur despite this fact.

[@egohicsum]

great video ❤️

[@mikiimiki9182]

Wasnt interchromosomal recombination in anaphase 1?

[@Nanorooms]

The linking already occurs in prophase I, since these homologous chromosomes needed to be joined together to be brought to the centre. The holliday junction resolution only happens during metaphase I or anaphase I, If I recall correctly.

[@kaushalgagan6723]

This is the video I was waiting for ❤ Best explanation as always

[@real_pattern]

evolution is more often a satisficer instead of an optimizer.

[@floweytheflower5261]

SONIC HEDGEHOG

[@lopsidedpolygon]

LMAO sonic as the final form 😂

[@cyberbiosecurity]

there is a gene that is literally called that. We also have Robotnik gene 😁

[@Gelatinocyte2]

@@cyberbiosecurity It's not a Robitnik gene, it's Robotnikinin - a chemical developed to interact with Sonic Hedgehog proteins (you know, for research!) -There's also a Shadow Hedgehog gene if anyone's interested.- Edit: I somehow had a false memory of there being a "shadow hedgehog gene"; there wasn't (I think). How did I misremember this?

[@raptorboss6688]

@@Gelatinocyte2lmaooo whoever decided to name these genes after sonic characters is literally the best person ever

[@cyberbiosecurity]

@@raptorboss6688 it was related to some flies develooping spikes on their back dependent on this gene. hence hedgehog

[@cyberbiosecurity]

@@Gelatinocyte2 it's called cryptomnesia, afair.

[@iquemedia]

what a fantastic line to end on idr why I subbed, but it probably has to do with the fact I haven't thought about how genes in years keep makin mistakes homie, I'll hear ya at the next one 🤙

[@varshneydevansh]

Can't remember when I subbed you but it's worthy

[@noelbreitenbach8673]

Gosh darn I love this stuff!

[@cexploreful]

Interesting and subscribed❤

[@florinteleanu9049]

Amazing syncronization with Veritassium's newest video on adaptation of duplicated genes in jumping spyders retina

[@Nanorooms]

I just watched it and laughed at how well it coincided 😂

[@bentationfunkiloglio]

I've written genetic algorithms (just to experiment/play with them). To-date, I've only used single point crossover when creating a child from 2 parents. Might need to try some more sophisticated approaches.

[@catmeme2446]

transposable elements are the other part of this story of gene duplication /deletions / redistribution. You should do a video on TEs some make retrocopies / retrogenes not just copy themselves.

[@gregoryallen0001]

@nanorooms you have a very good subs/views ratio

[@mapnzap]

Origin of Life question. With all of the diversity of DNA on the planet, is it possible to figure out if life started once in one location or multiple times in multiple locations?

[@andrewliu6592]

well there's a LUCA (last universal common ancestor), which has an estimated time, but you can't really estimate a geographical area because much of the rock from that time period doesn't exist anymore

[@gregorydriscoll8806]

Do we know why diversity is selected for? In other words, what caused the push for the mechanisms of diversity (like meiosis) to come to be? Was it for the health of the organism, or for the health of life itself, if you know what I mean?

[@calibandrive7487]

One kind of pressure (one of many) that pushes organisms toward diversification is the pressure exerted by infectious diseases and parasites. Let's say you are vulnerable to a particular virus, because that virus exploits a particular surface protein on your cells to break and enter into them and eat you. In other words, you have a vulnerability, and the virus exploits that vulnerability. Now, if all your offspring were exact genetic copies of you, then they would all inherit the exact same vulnerability, and the virus would spread rapidly among your offspring and eat them. But if you were able to give your offspring different variants of that surface protein, perhaps some of your children would be more or less resistant to the virus and would have a better chance to survive and outbreak of virus. One way to achieve genetic diversity in your offspring is sex; instead of cloning yourself to make babies, you team up with another individual who is genetically distinct from you. You and your partner then shuffle your genes together to make wholly unique babies that are neither identical to you nor to your partner. This is a useful way to hedge against homogeneity and resist diseases and parasites. "Don't put all your eggs in the same basket" is the same principle as "give your offspring lots of genetic diversity".

[@ThatSpazamataz]

Other reasons are that diversity allows for faster adaptability to changing conditions. Which is evolutionarily advantageous if a new niche appears or if the environment changes drastically. (For example if you have 5 offspring it may mathematically make more sense to make 4 that are ideal for the environment and 1 that is ideal for a slightly different environment. Yes the one that is not ideal likely will have a lower fitness if the environment stays the same. But the fitness cost vs the potential reward if the environment changes may be worth it (a bit like paying for a lottery ticket). I just made up the 4/5 ratio but similar things can be more evolutionarily stable. Another reason is behaviour. The selfish gene is a really good book for understanding this concept. But essentially behaviour patterns across species can be considered from a game theory perspective. And in cases like that if every animal lets say shares their food with each other. Then if your genes promote that you have more diverse offspring, statistically your offspring will be more likely to be able to evolve to not share and then take advantage of the other animals in your species. And then this goes even further than when your offspring start dominating the gene pool, they will also be more likely to have offspring which evolve to stop sharing with the animals that steal etc etc etc. Effectively being able to quickly evolve is in itself evolutionarily advantageous. Because even if it means more of your offspring won’t be perfect for the niche and therefore the individuals will be slightly worse off, it (as the previous person wrote) hedges a bet that prevents a situation where the ecological niche changes and your previous perfection is now a big problem that (due to not favouring diversity) cannot be changed quickly enough before your genes die out.

[@omargoodman2999]

Heh, snakes are coded in Python. On an unrelated note, I recall seeing a study a few months ago regarding how ADHD, or at least sub-threshold traits of ADHD, could be an evolutionary advantage, _particularly_ in more social organisms. In short, they had participants play a game simulating gathering food. They would forage berries from bushes and had to choose between continuing on their current bush, or traveling in search of another. As they gathered the current bush, it would gradually produce less food from over-foraging until it ran out. But traveling took a random amount of time to find another suitable bush. And they competed to see who could gather the most food. Participants who had been diagnosed with, suspected they had, or exhibited traits of, ADHD showed a significant tendency to travel in search of a new bush before the current one was depleted. Others tended to harvest to depletion or, at least, significantly reduced returns before searching for a new bush. And the "early travelers" ended up gathering more food, on average, and *not* by a small margin either. Iirc, it was something on the order of +10-15% or so. That ADHD urge to be distracted by "something new" and not get stuck on something boring ended up being a survival advantage. And the researchers hypothesized this is why seemingly detrimental traits can persist and be so prevelant when one would think it would be selected against if it were such an impediment. The answer is that whether it's an advantage or disadvantage can depend on environment and context. What *used* to be a survival advantage stayed exactly the same, but Human society changed, evolved, and developed _around_ it. As resources became abundant through agriculture and economy, the advantage such ADHD traits had to offer were no longer advantages; they were more detrimental and only had niche uses for people who had very robust support networks.

[@williamkibler592]

Good numbers brah

[@ConnoisseurOfExistence]

Nice!

[@manuelpena3988]

It's funny that you use an optimization algorith based on.... natural selection, to give an intuitive explanation of how natura selection works. It's just like a genetic algorithm! (btw thank you for the video, love your videos and, most of all, your subject)

[@Nanorooms]

-trust the natural definition recursion-

[@derex47]

Your videos are like sunlight after a stormy day

[@oatlord]

How do these copying cells do error detection?

[@someguy999]

There a number of mechanisms, but templates come into play a lot of the time. By template, I'm referring to the opposite DNA strand. There are also mechanisms that don't rely on templates, but they are more error prone.

[@ahmetmutlu348]

I suspect that viruses microphages etc are part of evolutions master program and transfer data offline where data is not accessuble the standard way.. i mean it has random access data read write capabilities which means out of main software data update which is something you do on cheat engine to update games rules on pcs ;)

[@ASL-cz9pj]

The mechanism seems work well for single cell organism. My question: when do DNA mutations happen in multicellular organism? I think of 2 options. First to increase the success of mutation of organism, it happens in every cell. But it will cause different DNA sequence in many mutated cells within 1 organism. This mechanism seems wrong to me. Second it happens when the fertilized egg start to multiply, so the mutate gene is replicated to all DNA in all cells. But the probability become very small. So we can find 1 mutated organism among many which must find another similar mutated organism with different sex so they can reproduce the mutated breed. With this mechanism how big the population needed to get a new breed/species? Any math expert can do the calculation? Does anyone have different options to explore?

[@davidaugustofc2574]

Yes, mutations can happen in different parts of the body, but it matters most during reproduction. A fetus has an exceptional rate of growth and so it can mutate more often. Tumors are often local, they spread through the body via blood vessels, but I can happen with one mutation.

[@melody3741]

OK, I absolutely must know what snakes leftover leg architecture looks like, please somebody fix those jeans in an actual snake. I have to know.

[@Angelmou]

there are snakes with leg atavism. Just google for snake leg atavism.

[@ramanShariati]

Please make a video on bioeleciy an morphogenesis

[@melody3741]

Also laypeople to my knowledge understand “mutation” to mean duplication, mutation itself, from copying or damage, and deletion. Its not an assumption that only mutation was involved

[@cruisewithspirit6021]

There’s no escape option

[@dragonzed]

Just stumbled across your channel as a recommendation. I liked it! Explaining evolution is hard! But please be careful when oversimplifying things. For example, isn't it really bad to even suggest that c.elegans evolves into the fruit fly? One should just say that they it is posible that they have a common ancestor. No spiecies that is alive right now can evolve into another species, right? RIGHT?

[@frankpower97]

so doing the mice experiment in reverse can we have a snake with legs ? like a really venomous snake with really fast legs, I would like that

[@mario97br]

A monitor lizard from hell xD

[@Gelatinocyte2]

_"I would like that"_ I don't think any of us would too lol

[@frankpower97]

How can you not like it ? Think just a minute ! It's not just a venomous animal enhanced , NO! It is the symbol of human hubris, it is an act of power against every law of nature, it is a spit in the face of evolution, no even more, IT IS A SPIT IN THE FACE OF GOD HIMSELF! And what ending better than to die to the most toxic venom from a creature even more dangerous and fast of what nature could come up with ? After the accomplishment of such creation, the majesty of our actions, life would be just dull and empty anyway

[@KWifler]

This may blow your mind, but, actually, evolution affects EVERY system that depends on biological organisms, including nonbiological things like youtube videos!

[@simesaid]

Facts.

[@cyberbiosecurity]

In healthy human body, on average, approx. 1 DNA error occurs every second. Given ~50 trillion cells in our body, roughly(and wrongly) speaking this makes up for 50 THz error rate per whole body. (wrongly, because in fact we can not apply "Hz" to denoting stochastic processes average frequency) still just imagine that NOISE, like an insane Geiger counter cracking. 🥶 like 500 dB noise

[@alanbregovic8889]

my garden could use a cute stripey snake with big eyelashes

[@stasglazkov8734]

"You understanding of evolution is incomplete. Here is why: " Its not. -----> I'm a certified genius.

[@TEPMOBETEP]

Mechanisms and all is interesting, but how is that started though? You explained how DNA can grow in lenght, but from where that mechanism of biology programing originated?

[@andrewliu6592]

the DNA polymerization reaction can be catalyzed by rna molecules. also, some minerals have been found to be able to catalyze the assembly of nucleic acids & proteins

[@TEPMOBETEP]

​​@@andrewliu6592 source? Because you are not answering my question, or i am not getting it. "Catalyze the assembly" but proteins assembled only by other proteins/enzymes with subsequent decoding of existing DNA. Plus, RNA is huge molecule and don't "just happen" in some wild mineral soup.

[@davidaugustofc2574]

​@@TEPMOBETEP why not look at how the experiment is done instead of clinging on to outdated beliefs

[@user-jb2om7cm8m]

@@TEPMOBETEP It's still a mystery- even the spontaneous creation of the DNA molecule itself is not understood- only small parts of it- and even then highly speculative. Beyond that that though, it's like using geology to explain the Rosetta Stone; even if you can account for the medium, you're not accounting for the 'programming' as you say, the actual necessary information, digital in this case.

[@TEPMOBETEP]

@@davidaugustofc2574 what experiment? I asked for source of the first claim. You are mentioning now about some "experiment". What is your source also? Where can i learn about "experiment" you mentioned? You are answering with some vague gibberish. What is your source? Study? Experiment name? If you want to answer questions, then provide source. If don't want to point the source out, don't answer

[@zamolxezamolxe8131]

When i take a bath, i feel sometimes like a bactrria floating in water

[@o.s.h.4613]

9:05 amogus 🥰

[@Nanorooms]

Ayy someone noticed!!

[@o.s.h.4613]

@@Nanorooms I literally pogged and pointed at my screen like some kind of primitive hominid, you had me evolving backwards

[@nescaufe1991]

Why is the leg expression gene named “Sonic Hedgehog”?

[@andrewliu6592]

one of the discoverers saw an ad for the game sonic in a magazine and decided "hmm that sounds like a good name for a protein"

[@Angelmou]

Scientists are Nerds.

[@asphalthedgehog6580]

Wish I had that name...

[@Clockworkbio]

LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[@Nanorooms]

Big fan of your work too!

[@Clockworkbio]

@@Nanorooms That really means a lot on my end! Nothing but respect for folks who can illuminate the math concepts in bio! Always hamstrung me in my studies.

[@edhernandez4344]

It's crazy to think all life on earth came from a single common ancestor. it's like this ancestor already had the blueprints for everything that would come to exist on this planet with the materials it could find, practically being shaped by it's surroundings, slowly adapting over eons to the environment it spawned into to have more and more sensory feel of the world around it. Also creating tools and pieces of bigger organisms completely separate from each other that would later merge. If that doesn't prove the existence of God, I don't know what will. It's just an ever growing paradigm of ways to feel and perceive the world. On a side note, I have really been wondering how a tree perceives the world, any plant for that matter.

[@Angelmou]

The problem with that approach is however while it is compatible with a deity belief, this deity is like the gnostic demiurge not any benevolent being especially not an allloving fatherfigure in most religions wanting a relationship with humans in particular, as it is build on a gigantic mountain of a high deathtoll with trillions over trillions of suffering and dead critters even each year (if you imagine that alone the number of ants on the world is estimated to be 20 quadrillion).

[@notionSlave]

@@Angelmou pretty sure the bible is saying God is testing us.

[@Angelmou]

@@notionSlave It also says that God smashes the skulls of seamonsters and that he did wrestle in combat with jacob and did lose the fight, despite of using dirty tricks like hitting him at the lower body parts or that on various occations God there liked the smell of burning animals. I meant the cutesy wootsy interpretation of loving father figure, not the "I'm the great male baboon tribe chief" text intent of the authors struggling with bronze age empires.

[@davidaugustofc2574]

You were in the right train of thought, just missed the conclusion. This doesn't prove the need for a creator, the fact is that nothing can prove. Probably will never be proven.

[@user-jb2om7cm8m]

Some evolutionary biologists have made this argument to account for the improbability of lucky mutations- that the necessary code is somehow present in the first replicators- perhaps in highly compressed form. I've heard this made as a secular/materialist argument against the need for creative input. But it obviously begs the question of where this information came from.

[@Conus426]

Wow

[@paolocarl.8205]

All I could think throughout the video is that I want to see a python with legs now, since it's possible

[@deleted_handle]

every time the screen darkens I think my battery went low.

[@peters972]

There is also epigenetics to think about though.

[@Gelatinocyte2]

Not "though", but "too".

[@peters972]

@@Gelatinocyte2 nope :-)

[@Gelatinocyte2]

@@peters972 I mean epigenetics adds to the layer of evolutionary complexity, it doesn't contradict it.

[@Manigo1743]

Drop the music.

[@vinniepeterss]

❤❤

[@Nahash5150]

It still doesn't make any sense. DNA is an absolutely massive molecule, and it comes with multiple layers of 'error checking' for duplication while at the same time allowing for small errors in some hope it will change the overall organism in a beneficial way? That's an insurmountable amount of random accidents that just happen to work. Biology is missing something huge by being attached to this evolution model which was proposed before anything about cells was known. No matter how much I study biochemistry, the less it actually makes any sense at all. No where in the universe do mere molecules behave like this.

[@Nanorooms]

An insurmountable amount of random events met with insurmountable numbers and time :)

[@ezbody]

One of my favorite examples of these "layers" of "error checking" is schizophrenia. That's just one of thousands ways things go wrong. In other words, here you have fun admiring the "beauty of creation", meanwhile, there are millions of not so lucky human beings suffering or causing suffering.

[@Nahash5150]

@@Nanorooms Last I checked, we have a pretty good idea how old life is on Earth. So not insurmountable. A long time relative to our subjective experience, but frighteningly short considering the amount of chemistry required for molecules to form a DNA strain. Evolution in biochemistry is a non-sequitur. It makes scientists look stupid because any cursory examination of the processes proves there is no 'small changes over time' that take place for the whole thing to work. There needs to be a new theory. Evolution is archaic. It explains NOTHING.

[@Gelatinocyte2]

The "bad mutations" got filtered out by natural selection: either they got outcompeted, never got the chance to proliferate to begin with, or got outbreeded and essentially getting reverted back to the previous condition.

[@laersonverissimo1715]

“No matter how I study biochemistry, the less it makes sense” Narrator: He never even saw the cover of a biochemistry book.

[@thesimplicitylifestyle]

What happens when the software starts intentionally changing its own hardware? 😎🤖

[@bhangrafan4480]

Who wrote this video and what qualifications do they have to write it? Why is there no author credit?

[@EdT.-xt6yv]

6:20

[@idegteke]

Random mutations are, indeed, driving evolution, doing not less (and not more) than making the evolution to actually happen: similarly, however, only to a mild vibration that makes the flour go through the sieve. Random mutations could be pictured more like lubricants than technical components of the streetcar called evolution. The evolution is actually started, guided and operated by the duality of the environment and the totality of all single entities inside it. Yes, the environment is still solely shaped by the multitude of entities it’s made of. This egg/hen dual nature of nature “stores” the unconceivably huge amount (and/or excellent quality) of intelligence needed for the entire evolution to happen (and, sorry for bringing the bad news, they have a source that is 100% necessarily external to our discoverable universe.) The very evenly distributed “errors” work more like a clock signal that makes the wheel of complexity to roll further to a next level of implemented intelligence. For the evolution to go towards the more and more advanced, intelligent, finally conscious entities (instead of a staying simple but very sturdy and progenitive), either the initial structure of our discoverable reality must dictate the direction of the procedure (motivating through limited resources), or the procedure relies on some kind of feedback that is being constantly sent back down to the lower levels of complexity. Which of these latter two options seem to be more desirable for you personally?

[@Jolfgard]

I'd be damned if epigenetics would modulate gene transfer to some degree. Considering that I am notoriously bad at comprehending anything that has any relation to biology whatsoever, you can rest assured that there is no direct relationship between gene expression of the parent and gene transfer to the child. Every intuition and hunch I've ever had about biology has always been hilariously wrong.

[@snickeringpopcorn]

the mitochondria is the power house of the cell

[@deleted-something]

This. :)

[@oatlord]

So, are there legit labs out there making custom animals now?

[@Angelmou]

Labs test at the current time to fill broken parts in to crosscheck - birds for example are dinosaur variations coming originally from archosaurians, still having the gene structures for the sauropsid teeth, but they are missing the parts to grow them due to their beak selection. So labs filled the parts again from the crocodile teeth genome as crocodilomorphs are just like birds modern archosaur descendants more closely related to birds and the bird embryos did regrow saurian teeth in that matter. In hypothesis it may be possible to debreed birds to theropod dinosaurs, but they would not be identical to them as many errors are not easily to be undone or where we do not have the orignal DNA as comparison material. It would also cost way to much without any commercial relevance.

[@someguy999]

We've been mutating animals in the lab for a century now! If you mean cute and fuzzy animals, rather than fruit flies, we've still been doing mutagenesis experiments for decades. The first gene editing in mice was done in 1974!

[@Crembaw]

Yes they’re called farms.