Direct genetic transfer among higher organisms doesn't happen, and in fact the mechanism for how it happens indirectly isn't really known, but probably includes viruses and some carrier for them between species like mosquitos.
Also, the chunks of information being transferred aren't coding for specific functions, they're transposable, meaning they're non specific enough that even if you copied them from one organism to another in corresponding area of the DNA strands, the results would be completely different.
It'd be like copying the letters "lp" from the word "alphabet" to the word integer, as in "ilpnteger". The result is very different in function to the original. It probably doesn't make sense (not a viable organism) and while it does help drive genetic variation which is important for evolution, that's very different from a wholesale copying of meaning (phenotype, or the function of the genes in the original organism) to the new word.
Putting it more simply, if you copy the genes for a bat's wings wholesale to a human, you don't get a winged human. The most likely result is something that won't grow beyond a single cell, or if it does it wouldn't be recognizable as human or even an organism. The chances of getting something resembling wings are very low, and a human that could fly using them is literally impossible.
You can't copy the moth's "stale offspring" feature to another organism by copying genes, it just doesn't work.
Direct genetic transfer among higher organisms doesn't happen, and in fact the mechanism for how it happens indirectly isn't really known, but probably includes viruses and some carrier for them between species like mosquitos.
Also, the chunks of information being transferred aren't coding for specific functions, they're transposable, meaning they're non specific enough that even if you copied them from one organism to another in corresponding area of the DNA strands, the results would be completely different.
It'd be like copying the letters "lp" from the word "alphabet" to the word integer, as in "ilpnteger". The result is very different in function to the original. It probably doesn't make sense (not a viable organism) and while it does help drive genetic variation which is important for evolution, that's very different from a wholesale copying of meaning (phenotype, or the function of the genes in the original organism) to the new word.
Putting it more simply, if you copy the genes for a bat's wings wholesale to a human, you don't get a winged human. The most likely result is something that won't grow beyond a single cell, or if it does it wouldn't be recognizable as human or even an organism. The chances of getting something resembling wings are very low, and a human that could fly using them is literally impossible.
You can't copy the moth's "stale offspring" feature to another organism by copying genes, it just doesn't work.