Here is an interesting discussion of a recent paper on the operational and theoretical definitions of "epigenetics". This term - which has a deep history, well before genetics - is interpreted in every manner from inherited histone patterns on chromosomes to parental investment and extrasomatic inheritance. The authors of the discussed paper go towards the former extreme, while Eva Jablonka goes for the other. It's always fun to see scientists arguing over terms.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
To a man with a hammer, said Mark Twain, everything looks like a nail. The better your hammer, I would add, the more nail-like everything looks.
In natural selection, Darwin had crafted one of the best hammers of all time. And in chapter 5 of the origin, 'Laws of Variation', you can hear him umming…
Myth 3: Darwin was actually a Lamarckian
This one is subtle. It implies that Darwin, because he lacked a Mendelian account of heredity, was not actually a "true" (or Neo-)Darwinian. The error depends on the extent of what is named as a school of thought in science and why.
As far as I know, the…
Epigenetics is the study of heritable traits that are not dependent on the primary sequence of DNA. That's a short, simple definition, and it's also largely unsatisfactory. For one, the inclusion of the word "heritable" excludes some significant players — the differentiation of neurons requires…
*sigh*
My swooning over Venter on the cover of the latest edition of SEED was rudely interrupted by Larry Moran. Evidently he really does get SEED 'for the articles'. heh.
Epigenetics at SEED
Yeah, um, this SEED article... this article is not helpful. For you, or me, or the scientific literacy…