B0ycey wrote:The thing is Kaiser, it was me who said the thing I underlined first not you asking me a question that never existed. So dirty tactics.
It makes no difference whether I ask you to show that neurons are independent of DNA or to show that how they process information is independent of DNA. Neurons depend on DNA for their functioning and that obviously includes how they process information. The distinction that you are trying to draw here is irrelevant.
Electrical signals must be generated and processed by neurons. This happens via ion channels which are proteins and the instructions to make proteins are encoded in our DNA. It's therefore nonsensical to say that neurons or the way they process information is independent of a person's DNA.
Ion Channels Underlying Action Potentials
Although Hodgkin and Huxley had no knowledge of the physical nature of the conductance mechanisms underlying action potentials, they nonetheless proposed that nerve cell membranes have channels that allow ions to pass selectively from one side of the membrane to the other (see Chapter 3). Based on the ionic conductances and currents measured in voltage clamp experiments, the postulated channels had to have several properties. First, because the ionic currents are quite large, the channels had to be capable of allowing ions to move across the membrane at high rates. Second, because the ionic currents depend on the electrochemical gradient across the membrane, the channels had to make use of these gradients. Third, because Na+ and K+ flow across the membrane independently of each other, different channel types had to be capable of discriminating between Na+ and K+, allowing only one of these ions to flow across the membrane under the relevant conditions. Finally, given that the conductances are voltage-dependent, the channels had to be able to sense the voltage drop across the membrane, opening only when the voltage reached appropriate levels. While this concept of channels was highly speculative in the 1950s, later experimental work established beyond any doubt that transmembrane proteins called voltage-sensitive ion channels indeed exist and are responsible for all of the ionic conductance phenomena described in Chapter 3.
The Diversity of Ion Channels
Molecular genetic studies, in conjunction with the patch clamp method and other techniques, have led to many additional advances in understanding ion channels. Genes encoding Na+ and K+ channels, as well as many other channel types, have now been identified and cloned. A surprising fact that has emerged from these molecular studies is the diversity of genes that code for ion channels. More than 100 ion channel genes have now been discovered, a number that could not have been anticipated from early studies of ion channel function. To understand the functional significance of this multitude of ion channel genes, the channels can be selectively expressed in well-defined experimental systems, such as in cultured cells or frog oocytes (Box B), and then studied with patch clamping and other physiological techniques. Such studies have found many genes encoding voltage-gated channels that respond to membrane potential in much the same way as the Na+ and K+ channels that underlie the action potential. Other channels, however, are gated by chemical signals that bind to extracellular or intracellular domains on these proteins and are insensitive to membrane voltage. Still others are sensitive to mechanical displacement, or to changes in temperature.
Because channel genes often contain one or more sites for splicing, multiple forms of channel subunits can be generated by a single gene. Differences arising from subunit composition can have a dramatic effect on the functional properties of the channels. Subunit proteins can also undergo posttranslational modifications, such as phosphorylation by protein kinases (see Chapter 8 ), which may further change their functional characteristics. Thus, although the basic electrical signals of the nervous system are relatively stereotyped, the proteins responsible for their generation are remarkably diverse, conferring distinct signaling properties to the many neuronal cell types that populate the nervous system, as well as providing the basis for a broad range of neurological diseases.
I acknowledge that I haven't been particularly nice to you on this matter, but then you have given as good as you got. I'm also not impressed by your defensive claim of "dirty tactics" just because I didn't prevent you from making ignorant posts.
B0ycey wrote:I don't really need to defend an opinion actually Kaiser. It is just that. I just cannot be arsed to deal with a sealion over something I don't care that much about - especially when we are two different time zones.
When you make statements of fact, as you've done multiple times in this thread, and want to wiggle out of defending them by saying it's just an opinion, I call that a retreat. You've also come back to this thread too many times to be credible when you say you don't care much.