Let's assume that you mean activation patterns at the level of single cells. Aside from the ethical issues which make it virtually impossible to obtain the full set of data, there is also the fact that the exact timing of expression is one of the major ways in which development produces variability in phenotype and so can vary wildly between individuals. The closest we have right now might be HUBMAP [0] or HCA [1], but I don't think that those had as objectives covering multiple developmental timepoints.
There are various types of triggers for gene activation, some genes turn on/off all the time (housekeeping), some follow the circadian rythm, some are immediate response, some are specific to specific phases of cell division, some are persistently on all the time, etc ,etc. Not sure what type of chart you're looking for.
As others have said, a complete dataset for that is basically impossible. You would have to monitor every cell type in an individual from the moment of conception until death. Maybe in a couple hundred years we’ll have nanotech robots that could do that, and our overall morals and ideas of what constitutes ethical research will have changed enough that we allow the creation of such humans with these robots inside them.
Of course it is, and you could say the same with regard to mammalian brains in general. However the divergence starts very early in development (seven weeks) so is very big and very significant. By the time a human is born the brain is very different from a monkey's.
Separation of functions/concerns is not great, for starters.
The testes are dangerously exposed, the plumbing is convoluted and failure-prone (and doesn’t recover well from mechanical insults).
The prostate, which serves no function outside of reproduction, lies inline with the urethra and quite consistently loses flexibility and becomes enlarged with age, causing all sorts of structural issues impacting basic urological function.
Female reproductive vs urinary anatomy is largely physiologically distinct (proximity and UTI risk notwithstanding). Though plenty of room for improvement there too — starting with endometrial tissue being far too prolific. Fun fact: endometrial tissue can migrate to the brain and cause haemorrhaging in severe cases of endometriosis.
Plenty of room for improvement across the board, I’d say!
Hey, $DEITY did its absolute best with the constraints and the requirements. But hey, can't please everyone apparently. Be happy you can relieve yourself well past the intended warranty period. The parts were designed to be easily _aftermarket_ replaceable with sufficient advances in technology, retaining the fundamental design without changes.
Mother nature hates weak things that die (that's why they get eliminated), so if we can make it to interplanetary species before killing ourselves, that would be a pretty huge sign of success. At least on mother natures benchmark.
> The most successful at communicating their view that they are the most successful
To who? Other humans?
It's seagull mating season where I am, and I don't speak seagull, but I'm pretty sure one of the things they're trying to convey to their fellow seagulls is that they're extremely successful.
Can't argue with it either. They're very much alive, which is the best you can be in this particular competition.
So, the most successful at arrogance? In other words, the least successful at humility? Ironically, since humble and human share a common root. Just playing devil's advocate here, but what you propose is not a good metric to maximize.
Corn, albeit not an animal has been pretty successful in terms of number of individuals. Their bi-pedal underlings have cleared swathes of land and take meticulous care of their well-being so they can bask in the sun undisturbed.
I fail to see that, it's simply one of all other random mutations, it's just that this one has a big downstream effect of enabling other more complex mutations
Arguably much less successful since jellyfish have been around 700+ million years ands it’s not clear if humans will make it even the next couple thousand.
But the jury is still out on that one
You're positing the existence of a far more advanced lifeform than merely a clever monkey with pretensions, which then somehow created said monkeys. That's like saying that it's easy to become a millionaire, just start with a billion dollars.
That's not an explanation, you just replaced a problem with another harder one.
Anyone know of a resource that layouts the temporal activation patterns for all the genes for the life cycle of a human being?
reply