I am looking to prove a point with students, and while the chimp-human relation is obvious, it's old hat to these kids. I need something to shake them up a bit, but must be able to back it up with a reliable resource!
Thanks!
2007-02-21 08:20:04 · 6 answers · asked by Seagull_72 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
I wouldn't laugh this statement off. Living organisms are amazingly similar at the genetic level - hence the argument for evolution. Think about it, if we use yeast (a type of fungus) to study humans, why wouldn't pumpkins be relatively close to us genetically?
DNA is DNA. It's all the same stuff although the amount and the expression complexity increases as organisms get more complex. While humans have an awful lot of DNA, only about 25% does something (that we know of).
2007-02-21 08:56:48 · answer #1 · answered by spoiled-angel 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dont think that there is much truth to this at all. It would be very strange if a plant and a mammal were to share the same DNA. It may be possible that a pumpkins DNA is assembled 70% like humans but have completely different DNA. Though I would imagine that a pumpkin would have a much simpler line of DNA than humans. Personally, I would stick to the chimps, but good luck.
2007-02-21 08:32:27 · answer #2 · answered by Zach A 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think 70% is right, I guess it depends on what you are talking about. Perhaps one has homologues to 70% of the known genes or something.
If you really want to prove that point, just use rats or dogs or even fish to make the point, I think you'll find a much higher similarity rating from those than you will a pumpkin.
2007-02-21 08:44:15 · answer #3 · answered by btpage0630 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
...It might explain some of the kids in my class.... LOL But Seriously, I could believe it. Think about all the life processes we share with pumpkins. We both grow and repair tissue, defend ourselves for invaders/infection, reproduce, do cellular respiration. We are both made of carbohydrates, proteins, fats and nucleic acids. On a strictly biological level we have an awful lot in common. 70% sounds reasonable to me. I wish I had a reference too! I'll keep my eye open for your "best answer" Maybe it will have one. Thanks!
2007-02-21 08:54:56 · answer #4 · answered by Ellie S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not right, and the reason it's not right is because no one has sequenced the pumpkin genome yet. Therefore, it is impossible to make that kind of a statement without the evidence to prove it.
2007-02-21 09:23:38 · answer #5 · answered by Sarah M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don´t think they will believe this. It´s rather strange. It depends on the age of these kids, but in general, it`s my experience that they will laugh their heads off at this statement.
2007-02-21 08:32:23 · answer #6 · answered by lucrecia 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋