Are you saying the whole gibbon chromosome 20 matches with the human chromosome 2 (excluding the inversion), or only um...well what percentage are we taking about here? And if it's not the full chromosome how do you propose it jumped chromosomes without a fusion?
No, the entire chromosome 20 is not homologous to human chromosome 2. There have been many chromosomal rearrangements in the ~20 My since gibbons and great apes diverged. Among those rearrangements are a specific type called a translocation. In a translocation, a segment of one chromosome becomes attached (usually exchanged) with a segment of another.
There are several mechanisms that can result in a translocation, but the simplest is related to the way genes on a single chromatid can recombine with genes from a homologous chromatid - a process known as crossing over.
In relatively rare cases, crossing over can occur between non-homologous chromatids. The result is a new chromosome that contains part of both original chromatids. A paper on this subject is freely available:
Thanks for the very good question... I am inspired to do a future video on the subject. (In fact, I have been planning to do an entire series of videos on genetics, so this would fit into that series quite nicely.)
Mostly out of personal interest and to stem the rising tide of ignorance. I do plan to return to school and persue a graduate degree in the near future, probably in some field related to molecular biology or genetics.
I'd like to add a supplement to your comment CrashCrazE13, not only brilliant but the direct implications of chromosomal mutations and explaining away ID and creationist challenges all in a neat 3:30 min pair of videos. You even cite your source.
Are you saying the whole gibbon chromosome 20 matches with the human chromosome 2 (excluding the inversion), or only um...well what percentage are we taking about here? And if it's not the full chromosome how do you propose it jumped chromosomes without a fusion?
honey2heaven 3 years ago
No, the entire chromosome 20 is not homologous to human chromosome 2. There have been many chromosomal rearrangements in the ~20 My since gibbons and great apes diverged. Among those rearrangements are a specific type called a translocation. In a translocation, a segment of one chromosome becomes attached (usually exchanged) with a segment of another.
(more)
phoenixshade3 3 years ago
(con'd)
There are several mechanisms that can result in a translocation, but the simplest is related to the way genes on a single chromatid can recombine with genes from a homologous chromatid - a process known as crossing over.
In relatively rare cases, crossing over can occur between non-homologous chromatids. The result is a new chromosome that contains part of both original chromatids. A paper on this subject is freely available:
ww w.genetics. org/cgi/reprint/146/1/69
phoenixshade3 3 years ago
(con'd)
Thanks for the very good question... I am inspired to do a future video on the subject. (In fact, I have been planning to do an entire series of videos on genetics, so this would fit into that series quite nicely.)
phoenixshade3 3 years ago
And again, kind thanks for an informative response.
honey2heaven 3 years ago
i wish i understood the details of that better i understand the gist but am unable to asses the quallity of the argument in any but a cursory way.
ooglebydoogleby 4 years ago
BRILLIANT! Are you a researcher? Or just doing this for interest?
CrashCrazE13 4 years ago 4
Mostly out of personal interest and to stem the rising tide of ignorance. I do plan to return to school and persue a graduate degree in the near future, probably in some field related to molecular biology or genetics.
But right now, it's just for fun.
phoenixshade3 4 years ago
Well I think it's amazing how deep someone can study into things like this. Hope you continue.
CrashCrazE13 4 years ago 2
I'd like to add a supplement to your comment CrashCrazE13, not only brilliant but the direct implications of chromosomal mutations and explaining away ID and creationist challenges all in a neat 3:30 min pair of videos. You even cite your source.
Sinmaker1315 2 years ago