Look-ahead effect phenotypic mutations

By Silly Designer’s suggestion I came to read this paper dealing with Cairn’s related problematics.

It’s nice to have a few models available explaining the results obtained, but it would be much nicer to get some bench results taking in account the partial polyploidy due to incomplete divisions that could explain a lot of Cairn’s observations.

But, and this is a quite important but, Dion J. Whitehead, Claus O. Wilke, David Vernazobres and Erich Bornberg-Bauer model is much more general, and will save us probably some electrons recycling for blogging, as it address the problem in a general manner, not just for stressed bacteria

Their way to deal with the problem is quite interesting, errors in transcription and translation which seem to be quite common, and if usually they produce stuff for the cellular trash-bin may save the situation some times. Most importantly, their approach indirectly justify why a so lousy machinery used for transcription and translation may represent a sufficiently important evolutionary trait to not be more selected toward a more proof-reading one. I think that this isn’t discussed enough in the paper, just mentioned in fact, as a speculation.

Good reading, a special mention for the assumptions section and the planned tests.

But why the code isn’t freely available? And, is it submitted at PLoS ONE?

I would heavily edit the whole paper to avoid use by Denyse or Jean probably, (DaveScott certainly) to support Intelligent Design or a greater credibility to the existence of god. I’m sure they may forget to read : “We wish to emphasize that the look-ahead concept is firmly grounded on the idea of chance and necessity and by no means insinuates a teleological feature of molecular evolution.” Usually they are unable to read ’till the end of the Introduction, so it could be profitable to let this sentence be the first one, not the last.

I’m not joking.