Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ncrlnk!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!hplabs!hpda!hpdslab!hpdstma!mck
From: mck@hpdstma.HP.COM (Doug Mckenzie)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: Re: Lamarckian Genetics
Message-ID: <1140001@hpdstma.HP.COM>
Date: 7 Nov 88 23:23:41 GMT
References: <8811022014.AA01983@multimax.ARPA>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard TCG Tech marketing, Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 21

I don't have a reference handy but basically Lamarck believed that

>Lamarckian evolution is not accepted by biologists today. There was an
>article in a recent issue of Nature which apparently (I haven't read
>it) reported something reminiscent of Lamarckian genetics at a
>unicellular level.

>I (and others) are not quite sure that this is a proof that there is
>validity to Lamarckianism, but it is interesting.

The difference is that in unicellular reproduction, the entire genetic
material is inherited by "offspring".  In multicellular organisms,
specific germ cells contain the transmitted genetic material.
So, in the single cell case, any change to the organism's genetic
material must be delivered to offspring (i.e. mutation of the organism
results in a mutated child).  In multi-cellular critters, "mutations"
to the organism (e.g. blacksmiths acquiring strong arms) have no effect
on children.  Only germ cell mutations propagate.

Doug McKenzie
HP/HP-UX Support