[ScientificBoysClub]

What is the rate of Evolutionary change in every generation of present time ?

from parents to child ... DNA must change structure ...

what is the rate of change in DNA ?

[Madidus_Scientia]

42

[Variola]

What is the rate of Evolutionary change in every generation of present time ?

from parents to child ... DNA must change structure ...

what is the rate of change in DNA ?

DNA structure doesn't change, it is still a double helix.
The genes inherited, and expressed change from parent to child, hence we have various traits of our parants/grandparents etc.

Evolutionary change cannot be measure easily as it takes too long. We have only measured our time for the past 2000AD yrs,and before that in BC,in terms of evolution thats a drop in the ocean. We have only really acsertained such a thing as evolution in the past 200 yrs. Ironically we can only look at our evolution by looking back at what happened before we became consciously aware enough to measure our time.

[kenneth]

Try to think about the following questions:

What environmental factors would still cause evolution? As our generations progress, what traits in humans would cause certain humans to die before they procreate or not procreate at all. certain diseases..other genetic causes. In this world we live in with modern technology/medicene and the advancement of knowledge, we have a certain advantage over other species as we are not all alone in our fight for survival. Humans are on an entirely different time table for evolution than other animals. Think about it, we don't really "stock up for the winter months" like other animals do, or we don't really have to worry about "being the fittest so we can hunt that jackalope", or we don't need to do  lot of things that animals do.


BUT
and i do not really know to what extent this has, because i've never really thought about it. But males and females still have to impress each other in order to procreate with each other( lets disregard alcohol at the moment, because that also might be an evolutionary catalyst,) so in a sense we still observe the same tendancies as other animals in that aspect of life. So the more "attractive" you are, the better chance you have of procreating.....attraction is different for everybody...it could include everything from  looks to personality. I hate to say it and I feel like a jerk (because I am a human, with feelings) but there are certain humans who will never procreate....the same reason there are those in every species that will never procreate. It could be any reason really. Someone could be the biggest jerk in the world and could just repel women for his entire life (not sure how much evolution would play a part in that though.

Another thing is that [most] other animals procreate often and with many females as if to spread their DNA. Humans, for the most part, are monogomous and really only pass on their DNA to a couple children from one female.

So what i am getting at is that in the large picture of the human race. I think it's really about who isn't procreating...which is evolution I guess. It's not how DNA changes from parent to child....right? the DNA that gets passed on is the DNA that will survive. It is the DNA that repeatedly does not get passed on that will die out.

*I am not a scientist, I am a thinker, so don't take any of my opinions or rambles to heart, just use it as a stepping stone to your next...probably more valid statement. 

[Bored chemist]

Accoding to this.
http://www.mitochondrial.net/showabstract.php?pmid=8302846
"Characterization of the mtDNA of 110 Chibcha speakers with 14 restriction enzymes leads on the basis of their time depth to an estimated mtDNA nucleotide substitution rate for Amerinds of 0.022-0.029% per 10,000 years".
If a generation is about 20 years that makes about 0.000051 % per generation for mitochondrial DNA. I guess the rest is similar.

Also re "Try to think about the following questions: ...."

Why? They don't help answer the question.

[kenneth]

how do you figure?