Re: Schutzenberger

From: Stephen E. Jones (sejones@iinet.net.au)
Date: Sun Oct 15 2000 - 17:20:22 EDT

  • Next message: Stephen E. Jones: "Re: I was hoping S.Jones would reply to this (was 'Mitochondrial DNA..."

    On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 02:31:35 -0500, Chris Cogan wrote:

    [...]

    >DB>1) Your list of 47 specific aspects that should be considered in any
    >>"evolution simulating" program is quite impressive.

    Thanks to David

    >CC>Where did you see this list of 47 specific aspects? I tried to find a post
    >by Stephen on the 5th that had such a list, but was unsuccessful.

    Here it is again:

    ===================================================
    On Fri, 06 Oct 2000 08:11:34 +0800, Stephen E. Jones wrote:

    [...]

    >WE>Certainly the further work of Holland and others in
    >>evolutionary computation

    SJ>I am interested in how biologically realistic and therefore relevant these so-
    >called genetic algorithms of "Holland and others" were.
    >
    >A basic sexually reproducing eukaryote system has the following (grossly
    >*simplified*) components that all play a part in reproduction and
    >inheritance and therefore any mutation and selection. Do "Hollland and
    >others" computer simulations have the silicon equivalent of:
    >
    >1. bodies?
    >2. reproductive systems?
    >3. cells?
    >4. membranes?
    >5. cytoplasm?
    >6. cytoskeleton?
    >7. organelles?
    >8. nucleus?
    >9. ribosomes?
    >10. enzymes?
    >11. DNA?
    >12. genes?
    >13. gene expression?
    >14. pleitropy?
    >15. chromosomes?
    >16. RNA?
    >17. proteins?
    >18. genetic codes (there are now known to several)
    >19. DNA transcription?
    >20. RNA translation?
    >21. Error checking?
    >22. mitosis?
    >23. meiosis?
    >24. crossover?
    >25. Mendel's rules?
    >26. fertilisation?
    >27. zygotes?
    >28. embryo?
    >29. development?
    >30. adulthood?
    >31. populations?
    >32. environment?
    >33. catastrophes
    >34. competition?
    >35. sex?
    >36. death?
    >37. adaptation?
    >38. stasis?
    >39. extinction?
    >40. random mutation-genetic?
    >41. randon mutation-chromosomal?
    >42. genetic drift?
    >43. natural selection-stabilising?
    >44. natural selection-disruptive?
    >45. natural selection-directional?
    >46. macroevolution?
    >47. possibility of failure?

    [...]
    ===================================================

    Of course this list is not complete.

    Steve

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of
    having been designed for a purpose." (Dawkins R., "The Blind
    Watchmaker," [1986], Penguin: London, 1991, reprint, p1)
    Stephen E. Jones | Ph. +61 8 9448 7439 | http://www.iinet.net.au/~sejones
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Oct 15 2000 - 17:18:22 EDT