| ▲ | roughly 2 hours ago | |
From what I know of cell biology (read: committed dilettante), the notion that one gene does X is rarely correct. The way to think about genes and the proteins they encode for is less “blue eyes” and more “metric socket wrench #5” - the protein is a tool, and lacking that tool means any operation that requires that tool isn’t going to function as normal, which is why you see such weird disparate effects from mutations and also multiple genetic pathways to the same pathology. Also nature is absurdly cavalier about using whatever it’s got at hand, so it’s not so much “metric socket wrench #5” as “the pry-bar/hammer/thing we use to hold the hood open” that gets fucky when the genes go wrong. | ||
| ▲ | hangsi an hour ago | parent [-] | |
To aid curious readers, the cell biology term for this (many genes to do X) is pleiotropy. The Wikipedia article [0] conveniently includes a discussion on its relevance in autism. | ||