Genetic Memory

Discussion in 'Biology & Genetics' started by The God, Mar 12, 2017.

  1. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Some individual members of at least some migratory bird species sometimes choose not to migrate.

    Migration is very often sideways, vertical, even around a loop or route, rather than north/south.

    There exist multigenerational migrations - where the travel time is longer than one lifespan. One can view some kinds of ecological population establishment - "hopscotch stability" in large moths, say - as existing in a continuum that blends in with migration so called - some kind of cues say "move like this, until encountering that; then do this other."

    Possible: That cue-response capability (move when cued, move like this, stop when countercued, act in this way now) may be a general root-level module of some kind, hardwired and inheritable, and available to a variety of "cues", "motions", and "actions" - learned, epigenetic, genetic, or any combination of .

    The question being: what exactly was that choice, that manifested itself as a choice not to migrate?
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2017
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. The God Valued Senior Member

    This is surely no woo. A feeble attempt was made by 'origin' and this guy michael345 is hell bent on declaring it bunkum and woo, but it is not. I am seeking some kind of impossibility aspect for such kind of transfer. I have seen none yet.

    I am not saying that if something cannot be proven impossible that means it is possible.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    You have to be joking but I am cynical enough to suspect you are not

    There are an infinite of ways to prove something (anything) cannot happen

    How do you suggest the Infinite ways be spread out amongst the hoards of keen investigators?

    By hoards I'm taking in in the high number of 3

    I suspect the ways to prove it can happen number less than 10

    Ummmm dilemma

    Should I go for
    • infinite ways why something is not possible and work for life because I can forever find a way which has not been checked or
    • limited ways of why something might be possible and have a chance of a major discovery if I find that might be way
    I am seeking some kind of impossibility aspect for such kind of transfer. I have seen none yet

    You never will

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. The God Valued Senior Member


    Out of infinite, pl give one way that it cannot.

    Your post is flawed, only one way is sufficient to prove the impossibility, you do not need infinite ways. And if there are infinite ways proving impossibility, then there cannot be 10 ways to prove it possible.

    And why I will never find that it is impossible? If I could never find that it is impossible then there is a probability, however small, that it is possible.
  8. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Eating a cheese sandwich


    I have just given you one way - eat a cheese sandwich - so does that settle your problem?

    You seem not to understand Infinity

    Suspect 10 or less

    I suggest you check on ALL the known ways to prove a negative

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  9. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    A digression, not a bird; click for incongruity.

    I still see no reason to presume life hasn't had time enough for certain aspects to evolve as they have. I admit I suddenly find myself fascinated at the question of what happens if we disrupt magnetic fields around the organism in ovo, and how that relates, when magnetoreception is involved, to the question of returning to a particular nesting ground or other such behavior.

    The Cornell Lab of Ornithology↱ explains:

    The mechanisms initiating migratory behavior vary and are not always completely understood. Migration can be triggered by a combination of changes in day length, lower temperatures, changes in food supplies, and genetic predisposition.

    To me, "hard-wired in the brain" is a genetic predisposition. This is within the range of our comprehension, generally speaking, even if there is still much we do not know. Quasi-lamarckian survival-defense adaptation heritability suggests there is some manner of generational teaching, depending on how we define "teaching". Epigenetics appear to contribute to certain stimulus-response data coding into the system in such a manner that is apparently heritable; this is demonstrated in lab rats, using something that smelled like cherry blossoms, as I recall. (And damned if I can find any of my own posted references that would list the source article. [sigh])

    Basic stimulus-response is pretty straightforward. The scent can be quantified; therefore, if [scent] then fear. What I'm less certain about is what would qualify, and not everything will work quite the same way, or else it does, because doesn't it all come down to proteins?

    Eat this instead of that; the next generation might inherently recognize the potential not because it "learned" anything, but simply because it developed (gestated) in an environment including certain proteins produced in epigenetic processes reflecting (responding to) the dietary change. And maybe those lines prosper in the evolutionary parade because they were a step ahead when the original food source collapsed and the larger portion of the population began its adaptation later and under more strained circumstances.

    But this thing with fear. What is it, then, if an organism has no word for fear, nor capacity for words. Drosphilia respond to changes in air pressure; they do not do so for a lark.

    Migratory or other conditional behavior might be survival-oriented, but this notion of fear does not quite work if the organism is simply inclined to follow warmth; there is little benefit, for our context, in psychoanalyzing affirmative behavior as responsorial―the organism is following warmth, not fearing a lack thereof.

    Long-range magnetically mapped migration in birds is an impressive feat, but the more instinctive behavior, quite honestly, does not seem so mysterious; it's just that we might tremble at enumerating the criteria as if in a database, though that's almost how my speculation imagines it. Essentially, it's a massive complex of if/then routines that only have consequence when enough criteria are met that the if is satisfied and demands a then. And, yes, life has certainly had enough time, as I see it, to refine a great deal of this.

    Humans can walk, chew gum, talk into bluetooth while checking mail on our mobiles in between building massive networks, hurling robots out into the Universe with thrilling local precision, and learn how to harness fusion power akin to the sun, that we might destroy most of the living endeavor.

    That nature has figured out how to build animals that aren't utterly hopeless from the moment of their accursed birth is not so much unsurprising as rather quite expected. How big of a leap is it from eating because one is hungry to moving in this direction because some impulse says that's what you do? And eating because one is hungry is probably unfairly complex; the basic demand is to consume, and everything else is circumstantially responsive.

    At a cellular level, a bird is made up of a bazillion tiny machines designed to particular purposes, the sum effect of which is a bird. Evolutionarily speaking, the tiny machines whose operation results in immediate migratory impulse are dazzlingly specialized.

    And from there it's if/then. Once enough criteria are fulfilled, and enough impulse signal generated, the bird does what it does. I do not perceive the necessity of transmitting, receiving, learning, and calculating data from one generation to the next in such communicative fashion. And to that end, hard-wired is a fine description: It isn't a matter of programming language, but the shape of the circuits the software acts on.

    Perhaps part of my problem in this is persistently trying to imagine the somehow in teaching each generation anew. Yes, it seems sarcastic to say something about show me the mommy bird teaching baby bird this, that, and the other, but perhaps it sets us up well enough to suggest that while bird language is far more subtle than we have previously imagined, I'm pretty sure she's not encoding actual complex math in all that. To some degree you can use your own experience. Nobody taught me explicitly how to do silly stuff under the water, and if you've ever, say, been pulled around by a foresail lost to flutter, there is a moment when you're trying to haul it back in and you can keep yourself on the deck but suddenly from your brain to your arm to the sheet to that massive sail full of so damn much air, and you've got a really taste of it because you can feel the shape of the air through the sheet as if it all really is an extension of the body—it's the damnedest thing, I tells ya, but it probably helps that every alarm in your reflex is clanging loudly at that point because, honestly, the stays really hurt to crash into, and if not you're landing in the drink, so everything comes down to staying on the deck and in later years you will, so long as you survive the day, find a moment to ask your father why actual lifelines weren't a priority back then. Hang gliders? I don't know; I haven't the courage, but I suppose that or a freakin' squirrel suit are about the only way to actually get the feel.

    And all that to suggest that to some degree, for the bird, once those wings catch air, the rest is natural. Every cell in its central nervous system is attuned to this. And, you know, eff all, you'd think an albatross would learn how to land properly. But it's also true, when you fly seven thousand miles a stretch ... no, honestly, it just cracks me up beyond belief, akin to the God/Darwin f/u bit Robin Williams laughed about once upon a time, only more so.

    It's true a bird can learn to maneuver just like so by watching others, but they're not transmitting the mathematical formulae any more than my father taught me the numbers for water skiing. I mean, sure, you can instruct someone in getting up atop the water, but carving is virtually all feel, and imitation helps.

    Or, rather, I digress. But I do think we should be able to see evidence of some larger epigenetic operational structure if we expect active data transfer. It's a lot of information, and considerably more complex than, say, olfactory memory or flight response memory. And compared to the prospect of specialized cells making a specialized organism that behaves in a specialized manner, that active generational transfer seems extraneous, and I'm not even certain how to begin describing the question of accounting for signal transmission quality in somehow being taught anew each generation.


    Cornell Lab of Ornithology. "The Basics of Bird Migration: How, Why, and Where". 1 January 2007. 14 March 2017.
  10. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Yes indeed. I am very sceptical about teaching each generation anew, which then means there is either hard-wiring or at least preconfiguration of the "software" in the brain. The God's question, though, was about inheritance of acquired characteristics, for which we have found there can occasionally be a mechanism, in the form of epigenetics. Perhaps this too can operate on inherited brain programming.

    Interesting, anyway.
  11. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    inheritance of acquired characteristics

    Does not happen

    for which we have found there can occasionally be a mechanism


    in the form of epigenetics

    Different mechanism

    Perhaps this too can operate on inherited brain programming


    I'm to lazy to work out how many if / buts / may bes are in the post

    The God's question, though, was about
    accession to skill features for which
    we have found there can occasionally be a apparatus in the form of modification of gene expression rather than alteration of the genetic code itself

    The above changes HOW the gene manifest itself

    Perhaps this too can operate on the
    aquired skill features of a brain to cause it behave in a predetermined way

    To late

    The gene has already been expressed

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  12. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Well I may have misunderstood, but tell me, what do you think this article is saying about epigenetic inheritance:
  13. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Many view epigenetics as an annotation or editing of the genome that defines which genes will be silenced in order to streamline protein production or squelch unnecessary redundancy.

    That annotation, they say, does not and cannot permanently change the original manuscript (i.e., DNA), but merely access to the manuscript

    So the book of DNA remains intact but some pages are unavailable

    It also appears those pages can be accessed in offspring and may be other pages locked out

    This is in line with how genes are expressed

    A long section which starts

    A fascinating 2008 study

    ending with

    remains to be definitively determined

    efecively says epigenetics MIGHT be responsible or it could just be because of starvation

    Although an organism cannot pass down specific information about its own experiences—the giraffe will not be able to help its offspring reach taller trees just by stretching its own neck—it may give succeeding generations a fighting chance in a difficult environment by offering them a slightly altered arsenal of genetic tools.

    Slightly altered arsenal of genetic tools relates to gene expression suitable for the prevailing conditions

    Change the conditions and some of the pages of the DNA close and others open

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  14. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Right, which means that the influences on one generation of an organism can lead to inherited adaptation in the next, no?
  15. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Correct NO

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  16. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Does that mean you think the headline of the article is wrong:" Epigenetic changes accrued over an organism’s lifetime may leave a permanent heritable mark on the genome, through the help of long noncoding RNAs." ?
  17. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Correct WRONG

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  18. The God Valued Senior Member


    I have gone through all your post, I see no reasoning for your stand. You start with bunkum then woo then cannot then no then wrong...

    Pl come forward and state why it is woo or why it cannot be done, give at least one reason out of infinite you seem to be knowing.
  19. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Hmm. I must admit I am not entirely persuaded yet. I'll need to read more. Can you direct me to any recent publication that clarifies this area?
  20. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Already done and dusted



    Still not get it

    Read again

    Still not on board?

    Read some other persons explanation

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  21. The God Valued Senior Member

    I would suggest you to be more pursuasive with logical argument. There is nothing in your posts to support your conclusion.
  22. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    I must admit I am not trying to persuade you

    My I humbly suggest you take out segments of your reference articles and split them down as per points

    Look for all the qualifying words

    Is the article making unsubstituted links?

    In this particular subject the link which appears being pushed is
    • a mechanism in the form of epigenetics
    • epigenetics (the study of changes in organisms caused by modification of gene expression rather than alteration of the genetic code itself)
    • epigenetics can modify gene expression and the ability to modify gene expression can be passed on (NOTE THIS IS NOT A PERMANENT CHANGE)
    Then the leap is made ' well why can't epigenetics work to change the gene and pass on learnt memory? '


    a system which works on the expression of a gene

    is being asked to absorb a learnt memory

    and use the absorbed memory to modify a gene

    Not modify a gene expression but change the gene structure plus instill into the gene a learnt memory


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  23. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Sorry bout that

    May be my newest post might help

    If not I am sure you will take other advice and ideas from other sources

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


Share This Page