Why do humans evolve for thousands of years with so few genes?

Humans are frugal in their use of genes and are more efficient compared to other species. Scientists thought that a gene was responsible for the synthesis of only one protein, but now it appears that each gene is responsible for making an average of three proteins.

Because of the presence of variable splicing, the total number of genes is less than the potential number of proteins. The degree of alternative splicing in humans is greater than that of insects and nematodes, and about 60% of human genes may have alternative splicing. As a result, the increase in the proteome in humans is greater than in the increase in genes compared to other eukaryotes.

Alternative splicing studies of genes extracted from two chromosomes in the human genome have found that the rate of alternative splicing of genes that cause changes in protein sequences is as high as 80 percent, which can increase the number of members of the proteome to 50,000 to 60,000.

Man, especially after entering the slave society, the evolution of man is basically stagnant, because when the survival of human society can overcome many influences of nature to a large extent, the natural selection of human society has basically disappeared, so there is less.

Because humans can make full use of their genomes without wasting them, humans have fewer genes.

In fact, we have a lot of genes. The membership of the proteome increased to 50,000 to 60,000.

Because human genes are complex, there are fewer of them.

Because humans are the creatures that can use genes the most, more efficient than other organisms.

The vast majority of the human genome has been assayed. Initially, it was speculated that humans possess more than 100,000 genes. When the results of the first generation of human genome sequencing were published, researchers found that the human genome contained only about 30,000 to 40,000 protein-coding genes.

Since then, due to the continuous development of sequencing technology methods, the error in genomic analysis has gradually decreased. The number of human genomes has also shrunk from 3-40,000 to about 25,000. Then another study showed that the number of genes in humans was surprisingly low, only a little over 20,000.

Because of the slow pace of evolution, nothing else has changed.

Humans can evolve again.

Human traits are controlled by genes, which are made up of the arrangement of base pairs. There are only 4 kinds of bases, namely: A, T, C, G, these four bases correspond to each other, A corresponds to T, and C corresponds to G.

We know that DNA is a double chain, and if one of the chains is AAAA, then the corresponding chain must be TTTT. However, when DNA replicates itself, replication errors occur, which can manifest as replication errors, one less base, or one more base.

Under normal circumstances, the formation of new species takes a very long time, about millions or even tens of millions of years, and the emergence of Homo sapiens has only been 100,000 years in total, so we still belong to Homo sapiens. However, if we compare our genes with those of early Homo sapiens, we will find that our genes are very different. This means that although we are still Homo sapiens, we are still evolving, but we have not yet formed reproductive isolation from early Homo sapiens.

The direction of human evolution

First of all, we must say that the evolution of living things has no direction, and the same is true for human beings. However, we currently have the gene sequencing technology, as well as the gene technology. If you have the conditions, you can use gene sequencing technology to check your gene sequence, and there will be a small number of genes that are unique to you, and other people do not have genes, this gene is your evolutionary path.

We know that there are more than 7.5 billion people on the earth, that is, there are currently 7.5 billion different evolutionary paths for human beings, but there are some genes that are unique to people that are harmful, and if this part has a great impact on humans, then it will eventually be eliminated (if you have no offspring in this life, your unique genes will be interrupted and no longer circulated, and these genes will be eliminated.) So, what will happen to humanity in the future depends on what genes will be preserved.

I think that human beings at that time should have become stronger, both physically and externally, very different from now, and more adapted to this earth.

It's hard to imagine, maybe at that time I would even have something to travel back into, like we couldn't have imagined that 100 years ago our country would have undergone such a drastic change now, and now the speed of development is getting faster and faster.

There will be significant changes in appearance and stature, perhaps because of better nutrition, or because of the popularity of smart products and robots. However, the brain should be smarter.

In the future, the human mind may become bigger and bigger, and the discovery of spiritual power may make people break away from their bodies.

I think with the development of technology, human beings will become lazier and fatter.

What will humanity evolve like in a billion years? Whether it will come to an end or evolve into another species.

Because the earth's environment changes very slowly, and human evolution is a long process, human beings have hardly seen evolution for thousands of years.

Just as the development of any species has a process from beginning, flourishing, peaking to decline, the evolutionary history of man is no exception. Just like the dinosaurs that once dominated the world, humans may become extinct or evolve into another species.

Because human beings have adapted to the current environment, there is no need to evolve at all, and today's human beings are really living very well, and this kind of posture is enough.

Yes, the human genome is degrading. This is a recognized, uncontroversial finding. This phenomenon is called "increasing mutational load" and is based on the great geneticist H. H. about 70 years agoConcept proposed by Muller.

Deleterious mutations occur all the time. Newborns have an average of 50-100 new mutations. While most are harmless, about 1 to 4 of them are harmful.

Normally, natural selection causes people with these mutations to die or not have children, so eventually, these mutations disappear.

But our lives are no longer natural. At the beginning of the 20th century, people with diabetes susceptibility genes were likely to die young. This is the normal process of natural selection.

Now, these people are getting life-saving insulin, so they live normal lives and have a lot of children like everyone else. (Type 1 diabetes, the kind that can occur before you have a baby, is highly hereditary.) [3]) Children of diabetics inherit genes that predispose them to diabetes, so these genes are not eliminated.

The same happens with many diseases with a genetic component. Those who might have died in the past are now living almost normal lives and passing on their genes to the next generation.

A recent study compared the genomes of humans living in previous centuries with modern humans and found that the frequency of risk alleles steadily increased during this time. Those with the largest increases are associated with diseases such as asthma, Crohn's disease, diabetes, and obesity, which are very common in today's population, which is controversial and the evidence is not entirely reliable.

It may be too early to see definitive changes.

Another researcher calculated that without natural selection, health levels would decline by 1 to 3 percent per generation, and he went on to write one of the most terrifying articles I've ever seen in a biology journal.

Thus, the previous observations paint a rather stark picture. At least in highly industrialized societies, the effects of harmful mutations are accumulating, and the time scales for their accumulation are about the same as those associated with global warming......Without reducing germline transmission of deleterious mutations, the average phenotype of inhabitants of industrialized countries could be quite different in just two to three centuries, with significant incapacitation at the morphological, physiological and neurobiological levels. If you don't usually read biology publications, this passage may seem prosaic to you, but this is the most alarmist of biologists.

If medicine and biology continue to advance, they will always be ahead of the ever-increasing mutational load. Asthma, Crohn's disease, diabetes, obesity, and other genetic diseases will have good ways to do the same, so it doesn't matter if the genes that cause these diseases are prevalent. But if civilization collapses, people with multiple genetic defects may not survive.

In evolution, people will gradually adapt to the environment, and continue to evolve, natural selection!

Over time, in order to adapt to changes in the environment, genes are also adapting and changing.