Practical uses of Evolution

[Machiavelli]

My understanding of evolution is that it forms a basis for much of Biological Science. Maybe this is wrong, but certainly, there have been practical applications of the Theory of Evolution in science.

Can anyone provide an example of how it is actually put to use instead of discussed in theory?

[llDayo]

Biomedical research, AFAIK.

[Plognark]

Germ Theory and epedimiology. Evolution is the complete backbone for those.

Many engineering design companies, especially aeronautically oriented ones, use a type of evolutionary computing to come up with the best possible wing surface designs.

They create a set of base wing designs, and let the system mix, match, and blend the forms as if they were reproducing, discarding the less efficient designs and keeping those that are better. If you keep pushing the selection criteria tighter and tighter with each "generation", you get better results.

A huge portion, if not an outright majority, of theoretical design work and system "tweaking" is going to be done this way in the future.

All based on statistical evolution.

Here's an example (http://www.soton.ac.uk/~ajk/opt/welcome.html) of what i'm talking about.

And another (http://www.aic.nrl.navy.mil/galist/dissert.html).

remember, google is your friend.

I can only hope that the infux of evolutionary computing will put a dent in the oddly high population of otherwise intelligent engineering types who've bought into creationist lies.

But I doubt it. Human stupidity and stubborness knows no limits, as far as I can tell.

[RBH]

Adam Marczyk has a bunch of examples of applications of genetic algorithms here (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/genalg/genalg.html) on TO. Click on "Some specific examples". And here (http://evonet.lri.fr/evoweb/resources/books_journals/record.php?id=343) is another list of applications of evolutionary computing.

RBH

[Dr.Xu]

My understanding of evolution is that it forms a basis for much of Biological Science. Maybe this is wrong, but certainly, there have been practical applications of the Theory of Evolution in science.

Can anyone provide an example of how it is actually put to use instead of discussed in theory?

Do you have one particular aspect of the ToE in mind?
natural selection?
inheritance of variation?
common ancestry?
They are all relevant.

A background of evolutionary theory is constantly applied to human genetics. Some examples:

The basis of bacterial antibiotic resistant and ways to overcome it
This explains why hospital infection is more difficult to cure than regular infection - and why one should never self-medicate with antibiotics

The use of model organisms in the mapping of genes relevant to human diseases
Unless we have similar genes - from a common ancestor, this approach would be invalid. We use the theoretical prediction that the degree of conservation in a genetic sequence reflects the "relatedeness" of organisms. So if a certain gene was isolated in the frog, chicken and mouse, but not in the human, reserachers compare the sequence of the gene between these organisms, find the regions that are most similar among them (hypothesis: has an important function so the genetic sequence was selected to carry little change) and look for a similar sequence in the huaman - thus identifying the human gene.

The whole field of population genetics (how gene (allele) frequencies vary in populations) is key to evolutionary research (speciation events in modern populations) and to monitor risk of disease in human groups.

Natural selection explains why the gene for sickle-cell anemia is prevalent in west Africans - and this can be translated into population screening programs for prevention of genetic diseases in countries like Brazil and US - that could offer Sickle cell screening for those that have African ancestors and Tay-Sachs screening for Jews (and not the other way around).

[Aravnah Ornan]

You will find some more good answers to the OP here. (http://members.aol.com/darrwin/genesis.htm)

[Manitoumulegirl]

Biologists commonly use survival of the fittest to weed out first and second year students in the major. If you can't pass calculus, organic chem, and physics, no biology degree for you! :D

Seriously, the theories of evolution form the backbone of the study of ecology, genetics, botany, zoology, etc. A better question might be how does biology NOT use the theories of evolution? Off the top of my head, I can't think of any area in that discipline where evolutionary theory does not at least obliquely apply.

[Asha'man]

Can anyone provide an example of how it is actually put to use instead of discussed in theory?

All drugs are developed and tested on animals before being tested on humans. If humans and those animals were not related in some way, that drug testing would be meaningless.

[Boro Nut]

All drugs are developed and tested on animals before being tested on humans. If humans and those animals were not related in some way, that drug testing would be meaningless.

Lab rabbits have had so much lipstick put in their eyes that they are now born with pink eyes. More evidence for evolution!!

Boro Nut

[Jayjay]

The way we fight hospital bacteria is based on evolution. If creationists are right, every time a bacteria becomes immune to an antibiotic, the organism loses "information" (whatever that mean) and presumably becomes simpler. So, according to creationism, if we just throw enough antibiotics against bacteria, they will eventually either become so weak that they can no longer harm us. But if the creationist information argument is false, then there is no reason why the bacteria couldn't come up with a defense against any antibiotics or combination thereof, and will only become more dangerous the more we try to fight them, and we ought to be careful about prescribing antibiotics.

Guess which way the doctors have chosen? :rolleyes:

[travc]

Frances Arnold's lab at CIT has been using "directed evolution" to generate novel enzymes for a while now. Basically, they breed enzymes, selecting them for increased activity in industrial "environments".

[Kosmo]

Guess which way the doctors have chosen? :rolleyes:
Which way have the doctors chosen?

[Manitoumulegirl]

Which way have the doctors chosen?

Doctors try to discourage the use of antibiotics for things like colds and other viral infections which antibiotics are useless against, anyhow. Unfortunately, many patients want the Doc to prescribe something for what ails them, and some Doc's do give in to this pressure. Another big problem is people who don't take their antibiotics for the prescribed length of time. The anti-biotic kicks in, the person feels better and stops taking his meds. Unfortunately, this means that some organisms with a greater tolerance for antibiotics remain in the patient's body. These tough survivers pass on their genetic information to succeeding generations and within a relatively short period of time, a new, completely drug resistant strain of bacteria has evolved.

Far from loosing information, the bacteria have acquired it. Their cellular defense mechanisms have gained one more defense against OUR defenses.

(Just in case yours was a serious question - now you know ;) )

[Kosmo]

(Just in case yours was a serious question - now you know ;) )

It was a serious question, though I misinterpreted the eye-rolling smilie at the end of that post as suggesting that doctors have chosen practices consistent with creationism (and given that I will be a doctor in 5 months I took some issue with that.)

[RBH]

It was a serious question, though I misinterpreted the eye-rolling smilie at the end of that post as suggesting that doctors have chosen practices consistent with creationism (and given that I will be a doctor in 5 months I took some issue with that.)Several of the so-called "scientists" testifying to the Ohio State Board of Education in support of the intelligent design creationism proposals last year were physicians. Not to demean all physicians, but some are in fact ID Creationists.

RBH

[Kosmo]

RBH--
I know. I've experienced that with my peers and it sickens me. Yet even docs in support of ID/creationism generally practice good ol' allopathic medicine (with of course the obstacles such as the one outlined by Manitoumulegirl.) Seems as though these docs trust that science, but ignore the implications.

[JLK]

It's the old inverse supplemental corollary to the Salem Hypothesis:

SH: Given an engineer => increased probablity relative to pure/applied scientists of being creationist
Corollary hypothesis: Given a creationist with a bio related degree => increased probability it's a medical or related area - nutritionist, exercise physiologist, etc.

Note the medical proportion of the sixty bio-degreed on the Institute for Creation Research site.

[Roland98]

I'm an infectious disease epidemiologist, and evolution is the core of my discipline. Why are some organisms more virulent than others? How do hosts defend themselves against the onslaught of microbes--and how do microbes circumvent these defenses? How can we use evolutionary principles to better treat (and prevent) these diseases? What will be the effects of a vaccine on the evolution of a particular pathogen? How have a microbe and its reservoir species co-evolved so that the microbe does not harm that particular host? etc. etc. etc. Not much would get done currently in infectious disease epi without a good grounding in evolutionary theory.

[Machiavelli]

Biologists commonly use survival of the fittest to weed out first and second year students in the major. If you can't pass calculus, organic chem, and physics, no biology degree for you! :D


Damned Evolution, no wonder I ended up with a Business degree. :mad:


Seriously, the theories of evolution form the backbone of the study of ecology, genetics, botany, zoology, etc. A better question might be how does biology NOT use the theories of evolution? Off the top of my head, I can't think of any area in that discipline where evolutionary theory does not at least obliquely apply.

It's easy for me to understand this, but I'm looking for something a bit more tangible. Something that could be reduced to a "Bushism" that can't be refuted by even the most dimwitted creationist.

Something like "Anti Everlooshonists want to kill you. They wanna stop yer drug companies from making medicines that work. So if you support anti-everlooshionisters, you'll all die."

[Manitoumulegirl]

Damned Evolution, no wonder I ended up with a Business degree. :mad:

Hey! At least you got out of organic chem! Hated that class, but made it through with the help of those cute little molecule construction kits - kinda like "Legos" for dumb ass biology majors who skip chemistry class because they're busy watching Drosophilia evolve. ;)




It's easy for me to understand this, but I'm looking for something a bit more tangible. Something that could be reduced to a "Bushism" that can't be refuted by even the most dimwitted creationist.

Something like "Anti Everlooshonists want to kill you. They wanna stop yer drug companies from making medicines that work. So if you support anti-everlooshionisters, you'll all die."

Microbes and anti-biotics are as good an example as any. Another thing to point out would be our current agricultural crops. Many sub-species of corn, wheat, rice, etc. have been selected and cross bred by plant geneticists to come up with hardier and more productive varieties. The principles of genetics, evolution, and speciation allow us to respond positively to changing climate patterns and population pressures, as well as emerging plant pathogens. The science of evolution (biology) has resulted in far less global hunger and famine than would have occured without it. God is NOT dropping manna from heaven, but your local plant geneticist is doing her best to make up for this oversight.

[Roland98]

It's easy for me to understand this, but I'm looking for something a bit more tangible. Something that could be reduced to a "Bushism" that can't be refuted by even the most dimwitted creationist.

Something like "Anti Everlooshonists want to kill you. They wanna stop yer drug companies from making medicines that work. So if you support anti-everlooshionisters, you'll all die."

I don't think you'll find something quite like that. For one, it's just not as easy to reduce evolution to a "goddidit" type of explanation. Second, even most of the examples in this thread will be dismissed by any creationist versed in AiG material (or similar garbage) as "microevolution." Y'see, they don't deny microevolution; they deny "goo to you" evolution. Of course, the problem comes in when they define any kind of change, including speciation, as "microevolution." So if you're looking for a simple soundbyte that's going to convince creationists, good luck--I certainly don't know of anything.

[Rudolph]

Backing up a bit to the antibiotics bit and skipping over to anti bacterial cleaners, it's their overuse that has spawned the superbugs british hospitals are now plagued with, the most famous of which is MRSA, so potent it's unkillable! That's why you're not to use anti bacterial washing up liquid, cos you'll then be evolving your own collection of superbacteria in your own kitchen sink!!

[Oolon Colluphid]

... it's their overuse that has spawned the superbugs british hospitals are now plagued with, the most famous of which is MRSA, so potent it's unkillable!
Yep, sort of, but worse than that.

Bad news: I gather that some Sa strains are totally immune to the stuff.

Good news: Even methicillin-resistant Staph a should be killable with vancomycin, which is the Super-Duper, heaps-of-side-effects, absolute-last-resort antibiotic.

Bad news: should be killable. Because there's now VRSA strains.

And someone here a while ago posted info showing that some strains of bacteria -- can't remember if they were Staphs or not -- actually now digest methicillin. It's equivalent to a group of people who can not only survive eating a pound of deadly nightshade, but who enjoy it and grow fat on it.

Sorry, can't find any 'good news' to end on.

[Roland98]

Yep, sort of, but worse than that.

Bad news: I gather that some Sa strains are totally immune to the stuff.

Good news: Even methicillin-resistant Staph a should be killable with vancomycin, which is the Super-Duper, heaps-of-side-effects, absolute-last-resort antibiotic.

Bad news: should be killable. Because there's now VRSA strains.

And even worse news--now with MRSA, they're not limited to the hospital anymore. Used to be that it was a nosocomial (hospital-acquired) infection; now it shows up in the community as well. (Thus far, VRSA has only been limited to hospital settings...for now).

[Plognark]

This is one of those threads that reminds me why I sometimes have the urge to drink slighty excessive amounts of alcohol :thumbs:

[Jayjay]

It was a serious question, though I misinterpreted the eye-rolling smilie at the end of that post as suggesting that doctors have chosen practices consistent with creationism (and given that I will be a doctor in 5 months I took some issue with that.)
I apologize for the confusion. That was a rather ambiguous attempt at sarcasm. In any case, I'm not a medical professional and never will be one, so my whole post was probably a bit childishly written from your point of view. But, I think that if properly formulated (like Manitoumulegirl did in her clarification), the existence of hospital bacteria and how we deal with them could make one of those nice "sound bites" that Machiavelli was looking for. No?

[Machiavelli]

I don't think you'll find something quite like that. For one, it's just not as easy to reduce evolution to a "goddidit" type of explanation. Second, even most of the examples in this thread will be dismissed by any creationist versed in AiG material (or similar garbage) as "microevolution." Y'see, they don't deny microevolution; they deny "goo to you" evolution. Of course, the problem comes in when they define any kind of change, including speciation, as "microevolution." So if you're looking for a simple soundbyte that's going to convince creationists, good luck--I certainly don't know of anything.

OK, that's understandable, even for a business major.

Anyway, I think evolution needs better marketing.

The whole "I didn't come from no monkey thing" is really popular around here in evangelical central. I like the little Jesus fishes getting eaten by the big fish thing that says "Darwin". But the darned fundies get a bigger fish with a cross on it that says "Truth", and it's eating the Darwin fish.

It's tough to go up against an all powerful diety.

[Plognark]

OK, that's understandable, even for a business major.

Anyway, I think evolution needs better marketing.

The whole "I didn't come from no monkey thing" is really popular around here in evangelical central. I like the little Jesus fishes getting eaten by the big fish thing that says "Darwin". But the darned fundies get a bigger fish with a cross on it that says "Truth", and it's eating the Darwin fish.

It's tough to go up against an all powerful diety.

Just get the one with the amphibian fucking the jesus fish :D

It's kinda hard for the to escalte beyond that point....hehe... :thumbs:

I mean, the jesus fish is a sideways vagina/fertility symbol anyhow, it's not that far off

[Manitoumulegirl]

OK, that's understandable, even for a business major.

Anyway, I think evolution needs better marketing.


It's tough to go up against an all powerful diety.

Only if you play the "diety's" game. There was an episode of "The Simpson's" where all these advertizing characters turned into monsters and attacked Springfield. Lisa went to an ad agency exec for help and was told that if people just ignored the ad monsters, they'd loose their power.

You just don't play the game by the Fundies' rules. Their basic premise is that the Bible is the literal word of God. If you tell them that you do not share this premise and have no interest in arguing religion with them, they can't accept this. Believe me, I've tried since I live in a fundamentalist epicenter, myself (it's part of the reason I now hang out with Schodinger's cat - she's better company). The response will be, "But God says..." To which I always reply, "Your God says, not mine. I am not talking about religion." The Fundie will then come back with something like "Then you are going to burn in ever-lasting flames!" And I'll say, "That's for God to decide, not you. I can see we have nothing else to say to one another. Good day!"

You can avoid a lot of needless grief in your life by refusing to believe in their god. Such a stance generally cuts all arguments off at the throat which is good because there is no reasoning with those people anyhow.

[Pantera]

Here's a shameless plug for one of my few good posts...

The Ames test: Random mutation and natural selection as a powerful laboratory tool. (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=74867)

[Richard of Chelmsfor]

Manitou Mule Girl.

What is a manitou?

Is it a kind of Native American spook?

[Machiavelli]

The response will be, "But God says..." To which I always reply, "Your God says, not mine. I am not talking about religion." The Fundie will then come back with something like "Then you are going to burn in ever-lasting flames!" And I'll say, "That's for God to decide, not you. I can see we have nothing else to say to one another. Good day!"

You can avoid a lot of needless grief in your life by refusing to believe in their god. Such a stance generally cuts all arguments off at the throat which is good because there is no reasoning with those people anyhow.

I've been going with a response that seems to stump a few of them lately.

I tell them that I've never rejected God or Jesus. And that when I die, if I'm to be judged, I can honestly look at God and say that it wasn't him that I didn't trust, it was my fellow man. Because it was not God or Jesus that gave me the bible and told me it was the divine truth, it was another human being. But I assure them that if God or Jeses were to to so, I'd devote my entire life to it.

The reactions are sort of funny.

[Plognark]

I've been going with a response that seems to stump a few of them lately.

I tell them that I've never rejected God or Jesus. And that when I die, if I'm to be judged, I can honestly look at God and say that it wasn't him that I didn't trust, it was my fellow man. Because it was not God or Jesus that gave me the bible and told me it was the divine truth, it was another human being. But I assure them that if God or Jeses were to to so, I'd devote my entire life to it.

The reactions are sort of funny.

You know, that's a really good response :thumbs:

I've tried to explain that thought to some religious friends of mine, but I didn't express it as concisely or clearly as that :)

[openeyes]

Just a side note about antibiotic resistance. I frequently have customers who say (as if they're a little extra special you know) that they are "immune" to certain antibiotics and can't take them anymore because they don't work. I tell them "they" should be immune to all antibiotics (since we aren't bacteria) but if they're fortunate, the bacteria that are infecting them won't be. If they aren't getting a response, maybe it's not bacterial problem, or they better be darn careful to take the full course of their new antibiotic, because, not only are they potentially creating resistant bacteria in themselves, but also for all of us. Also, if they should get a bacterial infection down the road a ways, they shouldn't assume it won't be susceptible to an older antibiotic, since it's not a given that it's related to their current infection of resistant bacteria (if that's what it is in the first place.)

[Manitoumulegirl]

Manitou Mule Girl.

What is a manitou?



Is it a kind of Native American spook?

Manitou, The Great Spirit, is an Algonquin term, often erroneously applied as spirit monster. Manitou combines the meanings of Spirit, mystery, magic, and generally is applied to the manifestation of some form of power that is not readily understood or coming from elsewhere.

[Killer Mike]

My understanding of evolution is that it forms a basis for much of Biological Science. Maybe this is wrong, but certainly, there have been practical applications of the Theory of Evolution in science.

Can anyone provide an example of how it is actually put to use instead of discussed in theory?

Farmers must understand evolution when dealing with insects that are dangerous to crops. Biomedical researchers and doctors need to understand it while investigating cures for disease, and finally scientists must understand it when looking for natural resources. :thumbs:

[Machiavelli]

You know, that's a really good response :thumbs:

I've tried to explain that thought to some religious friends of mine, but I didn't express it as concisely or clearly as that :)

Thanks, I like it because the only response they can possibly reply with is that I should put my faith in man, which to a christian is blasphemy.

And then, if you really want to get to them, you can say something really self-ritcheous like "You may choose to accept Gods word from another man, but I reserve that spot for He Himself."

[Richard of Chelmsfor]

Manitou, The Great Spirit, is an Algonquin term, often erroneously applied as spirit monster. Manitou combines the meanings of Spirit, mystery, magic, and generally is applied to the manifestation of some form of power that is not readily understood or coming from elsewhere.

It's a good word.

[travc]

Just a side note about antibiotic resistance. I frequently have customers who say (as if they're a little extra special you know) that they are "immune" to certain antibiotics and can't take them anymore because they don't work.

I'm guilty of that... of coures, I was actually working with plasmids that conferred resistance to a few common anti-biotics, so when I got a nasty cold with a secondary bacterial infection, I advised the doctor that we'd better just skip over those specific anti-biotics unless he wants me to breed a resistant strain for him. ;)

BTW: I wish I still had that doctor. After that episode, he explained his medical reccomendations very lucidly and clearly. Too many doctors go for the "because I say so" approach.