This article is talking about mutation. Two of them in fact. The E Coli adapted to a reduced food supply by mutations that allowed for additional food stuffs to be consumed. New food stuffs that were before unusable. At the same time it retained the ability to continue obtaining sustenence as it always had. It's absolutely fascinating. And even moreso that the same 2 mutations occured in 2 seperate colonies.
What evidence do they have that this is a mutation at all and not just an expression of a rare recessive trait that multiplied when the food supply was reduced? I'm guessing that they didn't test the entire population for the gene in question. Just because they haven't seen it before doesn't mean it wasn't there. It would be impossible to recognize until the dominant ones were removed.
“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.” ― George Orwell
It's not over when you lose. It's over when you quit.
