Energy-dependent microRNA biogenesis
Published May 3, 2017 Genetic variation and RNA structure regulate microRNA biogenesis
…primary sequence determinants and RNA structure are key regulators of miRNA biogenesis.
Genetic variation aka primary sequence determinants are energy-dependent and RNA-mediated. Energy-dependent RNA methylation is an experience-dependent link from natural selection for energy-dependent codon optimality. Natural selection for energy-dependent codon optimality links ATP-dependent microRNA biogenesis to RNA biosynthesis.
Ridiculous attempts to portray energy-dependent top-down causation as if genetic variation came first may continue for another 52 years. But see this report from 1964 to help you recognize how much pseudoscientific nonsense has been touted since then.
See: Dependence of RNA synthesis in isolated thymus nuclei on glycolysis, oxidative carbohydrate catabolism and a type of “oxidative phosphorylation”
Isolated thymus nuclei transport amino acids into an intranuclear pool by a process which seems to depend on energy from nuclear ATP synthesis (20).
If any experimental evidence of biophysically constrained RNA-mediated cell type differentiation was not linked from an anti-entropic energy source to nuclear ATP synthesis that experimental evidence might support the claims of pseudoscientists who think that mutations link natural selection to evolution of different species.
See for comparison: Codon identity regulates mRNA stability and translation efficiency during the maternal-to-zygotic transition
The bias between codons or amino acids, and mRNA expression levels has been previously recognized across species and is thought to result from selection for efficient, accurate translation, and folding of highly expressed genes…
My translation: Natural selection for energy-dependent and energy-efficient protein folding chemistry links what organisms eat to the energy that they require for reproduction via the accurate translation and folding of highly expressed genes.
Alternatively, virus-driven energy theft links the degradation of messenger RNA to all pathology via conserved molecular mechanisms in all living genera. Simply put, the molecular mechanisms of healthy longevity and biodiversity are nutrient energy-dependent and pheromone-controlled.
The fact that population geneticists have ignored what us known to all serious scientists about the controlled molecular mechanisms that link metabolic networks to genetic networks has led to the unnecessary suffering and premature death of millions to billions of people. If you are not willing to join those who are Combating Evolution to Fight Disease, you probably will be asked why you decide to ignore everything known about the energy-dependent de novo creation of genes. If you did not recognize your ignorance, try to find experimental evidence in the works of evolutionary theorists who did not start after the energy-dependent de novo creation of genes.
So far as I know, all pseudoscientists still consistently place the facts about de novo gene creation, which refute their nonsense about mutation-driven evolution, into the context of their published works. Those works will continue to cause the unnecessary suffering and premature death of millions to billions of people.
The fact that experience-dependent genetic variation does not create itself is a thorn in the side of all theorists who now recognize and must ignore the facts about RNA-mediated cell type differentiation. The facts link the energy-dependent RNA-mediated fixation of amino acid substitutions to all biodiversity.
The facts also link mutations to all pathology, which means the facts have always been evolutionary theory killers. The facts haven’t changed since Thomas Hunt Morgan presciently linked them to chromosomal inheritance and Schrodinger presciently linked the anti-entropic virucidal energy of sunlight to RNA-mediated DNA repair.
See also: Exiqon “Genome Web” This link opens the pdf for microRNA target identification by RNA pull down with biotinylated microRNA mimics
Approximately one in five microRNA interactions with mRNAs occur through non-canonical binding sites. Although of functional relevance these microRNA targets are not predicted by bioinformatics tools. Improved RNA pull-down techniques with biotinylated microRNA mimics open new possibilities to identify microRNA targets experimentally.
My comment: Although I have repeatedly mentioned works that link energy-dependent changes in the microRNA/messenger RNA balance to cell type differentiation and healthy longevity, I had not seen any mention of biotinylation, until today.
In biochemistry, biotinylation is the process of covalently attaching biotin to a protein, nucleic acid or other molecule. Biotinylation is rapid, specific and is unlikely to perturb the natural function of the molecule…
I do not know any theorists who are biochemists and suspect that all the ridiculous theories of pseudoscientists include nothing that is known about biotinylation. That may be why I did not hear the term mentioned, until today. What would happen if I heard it and failed to learn what it meant? God forbid, I might still be a biologically uninformed theorist
See for example: The landscape of sex-differential transcriptome and its consequent selection in human adults
This work provides a comprehensive overview of the sex-differential transcriptome and its importance to human evolution and human physiology in health and in disease.
The detailed map of these genes, reported in BMC Biology, provides evidence that males and females undergo a sort of separate, but interconnected evolution.
I thank God, for not allowing me to believe that males and females are different mutants of the same species.
See for comparison: We are all mutants
Darwin is a god in evolution, so you can’t criticize Darwin. If you do, you’re branded as arrogant.
But any time a scientific theory is treated like dogma, you have to question it. The dogma of natural selection has existed a long time. Most people have not questioned it. Most textbooks still state this is so. Most students are educated with these books.
You have to question dogma. Use common sense. You have to think for yourself, without preconceptions. That is what’s important in science.
Common sense? Masatoshi Nei’s textbook Mutation-Driven Evolution was published on the same day as my 2013 review: Nutrient-dependent/pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution: a model, which is a refutation of mutation-driven evolution.
…the epigenetic ‘tweaking’ of the immense gene networks that occurs via exposure to nutrient chemicals and pheromones can now be modeled in the context of the microRNA/messenger RNA balance, receptor-mediated intracellular signaling, and the stochastic gene expression required for nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution.
…the model represented here is consistent with what is known about the epigenetic effects of ecologically important nutrients and pheromones on the adaptively evolved behavior of species from microbes to man. Minimally, this model can be compared to any other factual representations of epigenesis and epistasis for determination of the best scientific ‘fit’.
See for comparison: John Deely, from the Point of View of Biosemiotics
….his unlimited but judiciously applied enthusiasm, his sterling example as a scholar, and his inspirational support of semiotic colleagues, institutions, and the ongoing investigation into the reality of sign process at every level of life have been and will remain a force that both inspires and that sets the standard by which our colleagues continue with their important work.
My comment: The reality of sign process at every level of life is that it is energy-dependent, RNA-mediated, and biophysically constrained by the physiology of reproduction in species from archaea to humans.