Genetic Memory

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

Some of our psychological  tendencies, phobias and even talents could be due to genetic memories that we have inherited.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10486479/Phobias-may-be-memories-passed-down-in-genes-from-ancestors.html

***********

Memories can be passed down to later generations through genetic switches that allow offspring to inherit the experience of their ancestors, according to new research that may explain how phobias can develop.

Scientists have long assumed that memories and learned experiences built up during a lifetime must be passed on by teaching later generations or through personal experience.

However, new research has shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited biologically through chemical changes that occur in DNA.

Researchers at the Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, found that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or stressful experiences – in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom – to subsequent generations.

The results may help to explain why people suffer from seemingly irrational phobias – it may be based on the inherited experiences of their ancestors.

"From a translational perspective, our results allow us to appreciate how the experiences of a parent, before even conceiving offspring, markedly influence both structure and function in the nervous system of subsequent generations.

************

One more link....

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/genetic-memory-how-we-know-things-we-never-learned/

************

One of the most striking and consistent things in the many savants I have seen is that that they clearly know things they never learned.

Leslie Lemke is a musical virtuoso even though he has never had a music lesson in his life. Like “Blind Tom” Wiggins a century before him, his musical genius erupted so early and spontaneously as an infant that it could not possibly have been learned. It came ‘factory installed’.

Genetic memory, simply put, is complex abilities and actual sophisticated knowledge inherited along with other more typical and commonly accepted physical and behavioral characteristics.

************

Cheers.

Sriram

[jeremyp]

Yeah that is utter bollocks.

There is simply no mechanism that would allow the learned experience of one person e.g. virtuoso ability on a musical instrument or even the ability to do trigonometry to be encoded in their DNA and transmitted to their children.

[Maeght]

Hi everyone,

Some of our psychological  tendencies, phobias and even talents could be due to genetic memories that we have inherited.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10486479/Phobias-may-be-memories-passed-down-in-genes-from-ancestors.html

***********

Memories can be passed down to later generations through genetic switches that allow offspring to inherit the experience of their ancestors, according to new research that may explain how phobias can develop.

Scientists have long assumed that memories and learned experiences built up during a lifetime must be passed on by teaching later generations or through personal experience.

However, new research has shown that it is possible for some information to be inherited biologically through chemical changes that occur in DNA.

Researchers at the Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta, found that mice can pass on learned information about traumatic or stressful experiences – in this case a fear of the smell of cherry blossom – to subsequent generations.

The results may help to explain why people suffer from seemingly irrational phobias – it may be based on the inherited experiences of their ancestors.

"From a translational perspective, our results allow us to appreciate how the experiences of a parent, before even conceiving offspring, markedly influence both structure and function in the nervous system of subsequent generations.

************

One more link....

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/genetic-memory-how-we-know-things-we-never-learned/

************

One of the most striking and consistent things in the many savants I have seen is that that they clearly know things they never learned.

Leslie Lemke is a musical virtuoso even though he has never had a music lesson in his life. Like “Blind Tom” Wiggins a century before him, his musical genius erupted so early and spontaneously as an infant that it could not possibly have been learned. It came ‘factory installed’.

Genetic memory, simply put, is complex abilities and actual sophisticated knowledge inherited along with other more typical and commonly accepted physical and behavioral characteristics.

************

Cheers.

Sriram

The Wikipedia page Leslie Lemke  doesn't really indicate that.

[Maeght]

This article from 2014 says a bit more about this.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25156510

[Sriram]

https://evolutionnews.org/2018/11/memory-new-research-reveals-cells-have-it-too/

***********

Cells have no brains. Yet biochemists are increasingly finding that cells do have memory.

The old picture of stem cells was that they remain pure and static, until signals trigger cell division and differentiation. Ongoing research reveals a new, more dynamic picture of stem cells: cells that can remember things and respond to their surroundings.

New studies in the skin, gut and airways suggest that stem cells, often in partnership with the immune system, can use these memories to improve the responses of tissues to later injuries and pathogenic assaults.

“What we are starting to realize is that these cells aren’t just there to make tissue. They actually have other behavioral roles,” said Shruti Naik, an immunologist at New York University who has studied this memory effect in skin and other tissues. Stem cells, she said, “have an exquisite ability to sense their environment and respond.” [Emphasis added.]

Apparently these stem cells transfer their memories to future generations of cells. This can be a good design feature; it allows the cells to “retain a record of past assaults to sharpen their responses next time.”

 “we are realizing that cells can be tuned” to adapt to their environment more rapidly and effectively.

***********

[jeremyp]

Please read this article

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2018/05/29/the-flimsy-evidence-for-epigenetic-changes-in-dna-to-be-transmitted-between-generations-of-humans/

which was written by a qualified evolutionary biologist.

[Sriram]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41437-018-0113-y

**************

Epigenetic effects are not only common, but can also underlie and influence many aspects of evolution. This is true for both epigenetic effects that are only expressed within a single generation, as well as for trans-generational epigenetic inheritance. In this special issue, Banta and Richards (2018) show that epigenetics can have profound influence over a number of evolutionary aspects. By using the quantitative genetic formula for the partitioning of phenotypic variance, they show that epigenetic mechanisms can underlie or influence all of its parameters. Moreover, if such epigenetic modulations are also heritable, they can be erroneously misinterpreted as genetic variance.

As this set of papers illustrate, epigenetics and epigenetic inheritance can have profound influence on evolution. Trans-generational epigenetic inheritance not only needs to be taken into account when estimating quantitative genetic parameters, but it can also respond to selection and influence adaptation to new environments. Thus, the emerging field of epigenetic inheritance has many similarities with the now well-developed field of phenotypic plasticity, which has moved from being considered a nuisance, into becoming a major research field with considerable importance for adaptation. Plasticity and epigenetic inheritance can share underlying mechanisms that regulate gene expression.

**************

[Sriram]

The research on epigenetics is very clear that organisms adapt to environmental changes not just during their life time but also pass on these adaptations to their progeny.

This brings into question the often quoted 'random genetic variation and Natural Selection' mantra.

It also highlights that there really is a process by which Intelligence could direct evolutionary changes. Intelligence is built into the evolutionary process.

[torridon]

The research on epigenetics is very clear that organisms adapt to environmental changes not just during their life time but also pass on these adaptations to their progeny.

This brings into question the often quoted 'random genetic variation and Natural Selection' mantra.

It also highlights that there really is a process by which Intelligence could direct evolutionary changes. Intelligence is built into the evolutionary process.

Not in the sense that epigenetics manifests some intelligent purposeful intervention in the processes of evolution and adaptation.  It is just another subtlety of replication with information being passed downwards through non coding sections of a genome in addition to classic processes of mutation and selection.  The process itself is still insentient and unpurposeful.

[Stranger]

This brings into question the often quoted 'random genetic variation and Natural Selection' mantra.

It's actually a very well evidenced mechanism and, no, no amount of epigenetics is going to bring it into question.

It also highlights that there really is a process by which Intelligence could direct evolutionary changes. Intelligence is built into the evolutionary process.

Utter nonsense.

[Sriram]

Not in the sense that epigenetics manifests some intelligent purposeful intervention in the processes of evolution and adaptation.  It is just another subtlety of replication with information being passed downwards through non coding sections of a genome in addition to classic processes of mutation and selection.  The process itself is still insentient and unpurposeful.

There is nothing 'classical' about random variations and NS. It is just a stop gap 'explanation' in the absence of a more meaningful one. Lamarck believed in active adaptation to suit environmental changes and passing of acquired characteristics to progeny. Even Darwin believed in NS on the lines of artificial selection. Now you have a mechanism for that.

How do you know it is unpurposeful (sic)?   There is clearly a direction to evolution and now we even have a mechanism by which it can happen.

Genetic memory is a fact.

[Stranger]

There is nothing 'classical' about random variations and NS. It is just a stop gap 'explanation' in the absence of a more meaningful one.

This is total nonsense. Mutation and selection have been directly observed. There is no question at all that this is the major factor in evolution.

Even Darwin believed in NS on the lines of artificial selection. Now you have a mechanism for that.

Natural selection is the mechanism that Darwin compared to artificial selection. Epigenetics cannot possibly replace variation and selection because it doesn't change the basic DNA sequence.

There is clearly a direction to evolution...

No, there isn't.

[torridon]

There is nothing 'classical' about random variations and NS. It is just a stop gap 'explanation' in the absence of a more meaningful one. Lamarck believed in active adaptation to suit environmental changes and passing of acquired characteristics to progeny. Even Darwin believed in NS on the lines of artificial selection. Now you have a mechanism for that.

How do you know it is unpurposeful (sic)?   There is clearly a direction to evolution and now we even have a mechanism by which it can happen.

Genetic memory is a fact.

I don't see why natural selection is a 'stop gap'.  It is merely an observation of what happens in nature.  What is the evidence that it is a stop gap ?

[Sriram]

I don't see why natural selection is a 'stop gap'.  It is merely an observation of what happens in nature.  What is the evidence that it is a stop gap ?

Well...I have always called NS as a metaphor...not as a real process. It is just a way of looking at the phenomenon....the real process being something much more intricate. 

And random variation is obviously nothing to write about because there is probably nothing that is truly random. Either it is determined by natural processes or by some intelligent intervention. Genetic memory points the way.

The above article clearly states that "Moreover, if such epigenetic modulations are also heritable, they can be erroneously misinterpreted as genetic variance".

[Stranger]

Well...I have always called NS as a metaphor...not as a real process.

And no matter how often you say it, you will still be wrong.

And random variation is obviously nothing to write about because there is probably nothing that is truly random.

Whether there is anything truly random or not doesn't matter. All that is needed is something that provides enough variation for natural selection to work on.

Either it is determined by natural processes or by some intelligent intervention.

A lot of mutations are just copying errors, so we know what natural process is involved. There is no need for intelligence and no evidence of intelligence.

[torridon]

Well...I have always called NS as a metaphor...not as a real process. It is just a way of looking at the phenomenon....the real process being something much more intricate. 

..

Don't get that.  It is a real process; it is actually happening, all over the world, all the time.

[Sriram]

Don't get that.  It is a real process; it is actually happening, all over the world, all the time.

What is a real process?  Random genetic variations followed by random environmental changes that cause some species to perish and some to survive?!   This is a real process?!

Heard of Phenotypic plasticity?
 

[Stranger]

What is a real process?  Random genetic variations followed by random environmental changes that cause some species to perish and some to survive?!   This is a real process?!

-sigh-

It isn't species that are selected or not - it's traits or genes in a population that is living in a particular environment. Those variations (mutations or just alleles) that aid survival and reproduction, in the context of the environment, get reproduced more than those that hinder it.

It's definitely a real, observable process.

[wigginhall]

Incredulity seems to be contagious.

[jeremyp]

The research on epigenetics is very clear that organisms adapt to environmental changes not just during their life time but also pass on these adaptations to their progeny.

This brings into question the often quoted 'random genetic variation and Natural Selection' mantra.

It also highlights that there really is a process by which Intelligence could direct evolutionary changes. Intelligence is built into the evolutionary process.

Read the link I posted. It’s not nearly as important as you seem to think.

[torridon]

What is a real process?  Random genetic variations followed by random environmental changes that cause some species to perish and some to survive?!   This is a real process?!
..

Yes of course it is a real process, one of the most widely observed, studied and documented phenomena of nature.  Why the sudden incredulity ?  Are you arguing that mutations that confer a survival benefit do not confer a survival benefit for some reason ?  It is real, it happens.

[Sriram]

Yes of course it is a real process, one of the most widely observed, studied and documented phenomena of nature.  Why the sudden incredulity ?  Are you arguing that mutations that confer a survival benefit do not confer a survival benefit for some reason ?  It is real, it happens.

Well...what can I say?! 

Rocks in rivers get eroded and rounded. Some of them break down. Some of them stay more or less the way they were. Is this for survival? It just happens by chance. Some rocks get eroded some don't.  There are many such examples in nature where the environment acts upon materials and changes them one way or the other.

The same is not true of living beings. They evolve and develop. They become more complex. They are not products of mere random genetic variations and random environmental factors.  That is nonsense.

Living organisms are products of active adaptations to changing environments. Phenotypic plasticity. The mechanism is epigenetics and genetic memory.   

When many scientists are agreeing to this, why are you digging in your heels and continuing to beat the 'old school' drum?!!

[torridon]

Well...what can I say?! 

Rocks in rivers get eroded and rounded. Some of them break down. Some of them stay more or less the way they were. Is this for survival? It just happens by chance. Some rocks get eroded some don't.  There are many such examples in nature where the environment acts upon materials and changes them one way or the other.

The same is not true of living beings. They evolve and develop. They become more complex. They are not products of mere random genetic variations and random environmental factors.  That is nonsense.

Living organisms are products of active adaptations to changing environments. Phenotypic plasticity. The mechanism is epigenetics and genetic memory.   

When many scientists are agreeing to this, why are you digging in your heels and continuing to beat the 'old school' drum?!!

I'm not beating some old drum, I'm merely pointing out that evolution is a real process, not a metaphor, and the principal drivers of change are the classic Darwinian processes.  Phenotypic plasticity may also be a thing, epigenetics is also a thing, not disputing that, but in the bigger picture, these are minor contributors to change in species over time.

[Sriram]

I'm not beating some old drum, I'm merely pointing out that evolution is a real process, not a metaphor, and the principal drivers of change are the classic Darwinian processes.  Phenotypic plasticity may also be a thing, epigenetics is also a thing, not disputing that, but in the bigger picture, these are minor contributors to change in species over time.

I know that evolution is a real phenomenon. I have never denied that.

The discussion is about the process that leads to evolutionary change, survival and complexity.  Random variation and NS cannot be the main driving process. Phenotypic plasticity and epigenetic change are the driving forces that lead to adaptation and survival.   

[Maeght]

Random variation and NS cannot be the main driving process. 

Why not?