Thread: Question about gamete production

Which cells are transformed into gametes by the processes of meiosis I and meiosis II?

Also, I was just wondering will homosexuality exist in the future? According to Natural Selection, if they don't produce offspring their gene types will eventually disipear. Obviously homosexuals don't reproduce, so woulden't it make sense that over a long period of time the DNA-proteins that cause homosexuality will be extinct?

Spermatogonium and oogonium (one of my most favorite words).

I find it interesting that you snuck in a question about homosexuality on a thread with a title about gametes.

We get questions like this all the time - we really should consider making a sticky or something. Anyhow, here are some things I wrote in other threads on the topic of homoseuxality that pretty well summarize my views on the subject:

(from this thread)

Originally Posted by paralith

I personally think that, genetics and evolution wise, homosexuality is probably more like sickle cell anemia - not that I'm trying to say homosexuality is a disease, just that the evolutionary mechanics are similar. In sickle cell, the heterozygous form (one allele for sickle cell, one allele for normal cells) has the advantage of slowing the spread of malaria. However, the homozygous form (two alleles for sickle cell) is disadvantageous and results in the disease. But, the advantage given to individuals with the heterozygous form was enough to maintain the sickle cell allele in the population, despite the cost to homozygous individuals.

Similarly, fully homosexual individuals don't reproduce at all, but probably many heterosexuals have some of the alleles that contribute to homosexuality, that both allows them to reproduce with members of the opposite gender as well as gives them a reproductive advantage of some kind, enough to outweigh the complete lack of reproduction in fully homosexual individuals, and to keep the homosexual genes in the population.

(I had trouble finding the original thread this one was from, sorry)

Originally Posted by paralith

Originally Posted by jacketate

My experties in evolution and genetics is very limited but i was interested in looking at natural selection when it comes to homosexuals.

If there was a genetic coding for homosexuality then because the carrier would have been ill suited and not reproduced ( due to being homosexual ) wouldn't the gene have become extinct by now.

I am personally undecided thats why i am doing this research project. So i can understand a concept which i can't comprehend.

As Jeremyhfht says:

Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht

There IS no "homosexual gene". This retarded idea is the result of politics. What there ARE, are a number of genes that COULD lead to homosexuality depending on your experiences in life. This means they could allow the user to reproduce.

From an evolutionary standpoint, intra-gender sexual interactions are used by bonobo females to strengthen their alliances with each other. This is important for them as females are the dominant gender in bonobos. They still, however, reproduce with males. I would expect that human males in particular would be most likely to use sexual interactions to strengthen their relationships as well, as males were the dominant gender during the evolution of humans. And the males that form the best alliances can dominate their social group, and reserve the majority of mating opportunities, with females, for themselves.

This is how a degree of sexual attraction for members of your own gender can be adaptive and selected for. And once the gene suite that influences this behavior is in place, as jeremy says, a higher than average dose of these genes and/or environmental stimuli can push some individuals to the extreme of actual repulsion for members of the opposite gender.