On Sat, 6 Dec 2008 11:32:57 -0500, Bill T <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Phytoestrogens, the substance noted, are found in nature and the phyto
>specifically relates to plants.

Right, but the implication is that if phytoestrogens can cause radical
changes in organisms, then we should be doubly on guard against man-made
estrogen pollution. Which we knew already, but this outlines some of the
effects.

The study demonstrates that individuals subjected to a high consumption of
certain substances show altered characters, which are relevant from an
evolutionary perspective, such as epigenetic and morphometric characters or
sexual maturation as a life history character.

"Consumption of compounds *such as* phytoestrogens by pregnant mothers may
interfere with the establishment of DNA methylation in the developing
embryos, leading to a change in DNA methylation and potential gene
expression patterns in the resulting adults."

What we are talking about is a direct environmental effect on heredity and
evolution, as opposed to the indirect effect produced by natural selection.
It means at least two things: 1) organisms can be beneficially altered
without recourse to actual breeding programs, and 2) organisms can be
negatively affected by the environment and pass these effects on to their
offspring.

pb

*******************************************************
* Search the BEE-L archives at:                       *
* http://listserv.albany.edu:8080/cgi-bin/wa?S1=bee-l *
*******************************************************