Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
James Franklin Crow (January 18, 1916 – January 4, 2012) was Professor Emeritus of Genetics at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and a prominent population geneticist whose career spanned from the modern synthesis to the genomic era.
Nature Reviews Genetics is a monthly review journal published by Nature Portfolio. It was established in 2000 and covers the full breadth of modern genetics. It was established in 2000 and covers the full breadth of modern genetics.
Not in Our Genes received positive reviews from the columnist Gene Lyons in Newsweek and the paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould in The New York Review of Books, [4] [5] a mixed review from the philosopher Philip Kitcher in The New York Times Book Review, [6] and negative reviews from the anthropologist Melvin Konner in Natural History and the biologist Patrick Bateson and the ethologist Richard ...
Unequal crossing over at the rRNA locus as a source of quantitative genetic variation. Nature, 272(5648), 80–81. ... a review. Genetics Research, 66(2), 95–107.
Transcriptional noise is a primary cause of the variability in gene expression occurring between cells in isogenic populations (see also cellular noise) . [1] A proposed source of transcriptional noise is transcriptional bursting [2] [3] [4] although other sources of heterogeneity, such as unequal separation of cell contents at mitosis are also likely to contribute considerably. [5]
L1s can further impact genome variation through mispairing and unequal crossing over during meiosis due to its repetitive DNA sequences. [4] L1 gene products are also required by many non-autonomous Alu and SVA SINE retrotransposons.
The book has been widely denounced by scientists, including many of those whose work is cited in the book itself. [9] [10] [11] On 8 August 2014, The New York Times Book Review published an open letter signed by 139 faculty members in population genetics and evolutionary biology [9] [10] which read: [13]
Copy number variation was initially thought to occupy an extremely small and negligible portion of the genome through cytogenetic observations. [12] Copy number variations were generally associated only with small tandem repeats or specific genetic disorders, [13] therefore, copy number variations were initially only examined in terms of specific loci.