• AdmiralShat@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    4 months ago

    You’d think it’d be the opposite? “The wolves who were most resistant to cancer were the ones who passed on their genetics” seems like a pretty easy thing to understand

    • neuropean@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      The mention genetic changes, but didn’t mention any gene names. I would have been interested to see something like TP53 duplications but there’s no way enough time would have passed for that to occur. It’s not super clear whether the population changes reflect a bottleneck or specific, advantageous mutations to cancer resistance.

      • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        You’d want to look at the actual paper or at least a more science focused report on it for information like that.

        • neuropean@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          I would except it doesn’t appear to be published yet, the article mentions the data was from a conference presentation.