In article <schwarze.ccomail-2708952145080001 at fennel.bio.caltech.edu>,
Erich Schwarz <schwarze.ccomail at starbase1.caltech.edu> wrote:
> My own *opinion*, if anyone cares, is that mitochondria are a bad
>place on which to base arguments about the genetic code, because they do
>not have particularly normal genomes.
Quite right! And to some extent that is indeed the point of Keith's (and
Thomas Jukes's) argument. It's clear that the code would be subject
to fewer constraints on its evolution in mitos than in free-living
organisms. That's precisely why it's bad luck for Hubert's theory
that most of the deviations from the "standard" code are found there.
This is _exactly_ what you'd predict if such deviations were recently
evolved, rather than being "fossil" remnants of a more diverse set of
codes as Yockey proposes.
Opinions are mine alone; I never met a university with opionions!
Steve LaBonne ********************* (labonnes at cnsunix.albany.edu)
"It can never be satisfied, the mind, never." - Wallace Stevens