Baxter, Janella
(2026)
From the Elephant to Butyric Acid Bacterium – it is [Not] all the Same! How the Genetic Code is Not Universal (with apologies to Albert Jan Kluyver).
[Preprint]
Abstract
Traditional cannon in biology holds that there is a single, universal genetic code. It is common to see the continued use of the language “universal” even in the face of a number of alternative codes found in microbes, mitochondria, chloroplasts, and other plastids. Often motivated by a popular understanding of Crick’s frozen accident theory, this usage is often justified by appeal to the relative insignificance of nonstandard genetic codes.
In this paper, I argue that commenters misuse relative significance as a means to resist thinking more deeply about popular theories. When used to minimize the challenges a phenomena represents to popular theories, relative significance debates interfere with the pursuit of more productive research questions. I offer a more promising way of thinking about the relative significance of nonstandard genetic codes.
I propose conceptualizing a plurality of genetic codes with varying degrees of invariance (Woodward 2003). Doing so has the potential to facilitate greater understanding of genetic code structure and evolution (Potochnik 2017) and provide the conceptual framework necessary for justifying biological practices.
Monthly Views for the past 3 years
Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years
Plum Analytics
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
![[img]](https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/style/images/fileicons/text.png)
![[feed]](http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/style/images/feed-icon-32x32.png){kind=icon}