Vi bruger Cookies!     

         
 X     
intelligentdesign

Intelligent Design, Creationism and Evolution in Denmark and the rest of the world


Analysis of the mitochondrial ATP6 gene from various vertebrates


Systematic names and GeneBank numbers: see at the end of the text

This work was inspired by this paper.
Jeanson: Answers research Journal Vol 6 (2013) 467-501. Recent, Functionally Diverse Origin for Mitochondrial Genes from ~2700 Metazoan Species

The paper can be found on this link

The paper analyze all then known sequences of mitochondrial genome (mtDNA) from animals.

All genes in the genome were analyzed separately. The paper shows data that seem to contradict evolution. The mitochondrial ATP6-gene does not follow the expected pattern of homology between species.

The reason only the ATP6 gene is analyzed here is that the other mitochondrial genes pose no challenge to the theory of evolution, as the homology between species follow the generally accepted phylogeny based on anatomy.

When a few species are selected, and the number of non-homologous amino acids are counted, it seems to contradict the phylogeny based on anatomy:

Struthio - Homo:               103
Struthio - Gadus:                73
Homo - Gadus:                 111

This indicates the following phylogeny

Phylogeny based on anatomy:    (Homo - Struthio) Gadus

Phylogeny based on ATP6:        (Gadus - Struthio) Homo

Which confirm Jeanson’s results and apparently contradict evolution.

I have done a more thorough analysis of ATP6 from a few selected species. The results refuse Jeanson’s theory based on the results.


Jeanson speculate that the fact that bony fish, amphibians, ‘reptiles’ and birds share higher homology at this gene, than any of these share with mammals, might be due to the fact that all lay eggs (Jeanson p. 497).
This hypothesis can be investigated (and refuted) by including the egg-laying mammal the platypus (Ornithorhynchus), an egg-laying snake (Python) and a killifish that gives birth to live young (
Cyprinodon). Close inspection of figure 2 in Jeanson’s paper shows that some Squamata (lizards and snakes) do not fall in the same group as the rest, when grouped based on the ATP6-gene. It turns out to be the snakes, here represented by Python regius.
Cyprinodon does not produce an egg-yolk within the body of the mother. The unborn young are fed directly from the mother via a placenta-like structure.

When the snake, the platypus and the killifish are compared with the rest of the species (including all the mentioned and a marsupial (Vombatus ursinus), see list below), the platypus group with the two other mammals, the snake does not group with any of the others, and the killifish group with the Cod. This supports the generally accepted phylogeny, but contradicts Jeanson’s suggestion that the homology of ATP6 reflect some kind of function correlated with laying eggs.

List of species and GeneBank numbers of sequences used.

Mammal, Placental, Homo sapiens, Human:             AP008820

Mammal, Monotreme, Ornithorhynchus anatinus:    NC_000891

Mammal, Marsupian, Vombatus ursinus:                 
AJ304826
Bird, Struthio camelus, Ostrich:                                Y12025
Squamata, Snake, Boa:                                             
AB177354
Squamata, Snake, Python:                                        
AB177878
Squamata, Lizard, Gekko swinhinis:                        
JQ906550
Squamata, Lizard,
Smaug warreni:                            AB079613
Amphibian, Bufo japonicus:                                      AB303363
Bony fish, Gadus morhua, Cod:                                AM489716
Bony fish, Cyprinodon nevadensis:                          KP064222

Non-homologous amino acids

 

Homo

Vombatus

Ornithorh.

Struthio

Gekko

Smaug

Python

Bufo

Gadus

Vombatus

64

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ornithorh.

58

37

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Struthio

103

95

87

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gekko

111

105

99

79

 

 

 

 

 

Smaug

112

102

99

82

91

 

 

 

 

Python

113

114

110

94

111

111

 

 

 

Bufo

100

90

87

65

80

82

101

 

 

Gadus

111

99

102

73

82

78

112

62

 

Cyprinodon

111

100

99

62

91

92

107

63

55


Additional argument
Then why does the mammals not group with the other land-vertebrates excluding the fish, and why does the snakes make up a seperate group?
On closer inspection ATP6 falls in 5 distinct parts, with alternating high and low homology, when various vertebrates are compared.
This suggests that the exact sequences in these parts are not very important for protein function, leaving the possibility for some larger mutation to happen within one or more of these areas: translocations or inversions are two possibilities. 

If such an event happened in the gene of the common ancestor of all mammals (and of all snakes), it would immediately set this species apart from the rest of the vertebrates as reflected when the proteins are compared.
These possibilities cannot be investigated in any simple way, as too many generations have passed since the last common ancestor of any of these species.

 

 

Opdateret 28/08/2015