Jeffrey Mattox (jeff at cher.heurikon.com) writes:
>Your assumption that "higher" species are more complex genetically is
>incorrect. In fact, there is little relationship between the genetic
>complexity of a genome and the organism for which it codes.
>Salamanders, for example, have 50 times more DNA than humans.
Although this is correct, it is a fallacy to assume that "more DNA"
means "More complex DNA". Much of salamander DNA is in the form of
simple repeats. In this sense, the sentence "To be or not to be"
is more complex than "asasasas dfdfdfdf ghghghghgh hjhjhjhjhj
klklklk" for example. From all the crap in a salamander genome,
you could compress the information required to "make" a salamander
into a much smaller space than that to "make" a human.
>This is the "C-value paradox."
I don't see this as a paradox at all - it's just an interesting
phenomenon. Any other thoughts?
=Dr Shane McKee====== __ "As a matter of fact, I do have
=Royal Belfast Hosp== / \ a plan - and it's so cunning,
=for Sick Children=== / 0 ] you could put a tail on it
=N.Ireland, UK======= \/\_/ and call it a weasel."
