border
sSNAKESs : Reptile Forum
 

Go Back   sSNAKESs : Reptile Forum > Community Forums > General Discussion

Notices

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-22-03, 05:44 PM   #31 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr-2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Age: 30
Posts: 5,325
Send a message via ICQ to Bartman
WOW..i just learned a lot more then i thought
Keep it comming, this is very interesting
__________________
Adam
Bartman is offline  
Old 12-22-03, 06:04 PM   #32 (permalink)
Member
 
Crotalus75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov-2003
Posts: 199
Country:
"Evolution doesn't cause adaptation. Adaptation happens randomly (via mutations and genetic variability due to crossover if I recall correctly),"

But natural selection for or against these mutations is the process of evolution. Ultimately evolutionary forces are what gives rise to all new adaptations. Migration is a source of new alleles in a population, but mutation and recombination (during prophase 1 of meiosis) are the cause of ALL completely new alleles.
__________________
~ Tad Wood ~

Last edited by Crotalus75; 12-22-03 at 07:10 PM..
Crotalus75 is offline  
Old 12-22-03, 06:37 PM   #33 (permalink)
Zoe
Member
 
Zoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar-2002
Location: Ottawa
Age: 31
Posts: 3,288
Send a message via MSN to Zoe
Quote:
Ultimately evolution is the force that gives rise to all new adaptations.
Perhaps I'm not understanding how you're saying things, but I still think you have the two terms backwards. Adaptations often eventually lead to evolution - not the other way around.

Quote:
Im am not doubting that evolution is a long and slow process
Isn't that what you are saying, though? That species stay the same then very rapidly, over a few generations, become a new species? If that's what you're saying, then IYO evolution is rapid.

Quote:
Species do in fact tend to remain stable for long periods of time and then to change relatively abruptly-or rather, to be replaced by newer and more successful forms.
See, I just don't see the logic in that. Obviously, the period of time during one species is actually becoming another is shorter, but I don't see how one species could remain exactly the same over geological eras, despite climate changes, natural disasters, etc etc etc and then suddenly be replaced by an entirely differnent species.
For example, punctuated equilibrium can't be solely responsible for the Compsognathus(a little dino that archaeopteryx is believed to have evolved from)-Archaeopteryx transition. Now, archaeopteryx lived during a relatively short period of time during the upper jurassic era - it obviously wasn't "meant" to survive as a species but "meant" to become another. If punctuated equilibrium were true, archaeopteryx never would have existed and Compsognathus would have been immediately replaced by birds. Or even, Archaeopteryx would have become a bird - but it didn't. There were several intermediate steps between Archaeopteryx and birds.

Zoe
Zoe is offline  
Old 12-22-03, 06:46 PM   #34 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr-2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Age: 30
Posts: 5,325
Send a message via ICQ to Bartman
Im not as educated as you guys but from reading all your posts what i think im understanding, on one side of things, is that if for example you have a leopard gecko. Over lets say 10000 years the ground on where they live was gradually becoming to harsh for them to live on..would they, over 10000+ years, begin becomming aboreal? Or adapt some new way to survive in the environment that slowly became un-livable?
__________________
Adam
Bartman is offline  
Old 12-22-03, 06:51 PM   #35 (permalink)
Zoe
Member
 
Zoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar-2002
Location: Ottawa
Age: 31
Posts: 3,288
Send a message via MSN to Zoe
They could, or they might simply die. It could go either way depending on what the change is and the mutations the leos are capable of.

Zoe
Zoe is offline  
Login to remove ads
Old 12-22-03, 07:05 PM   #36 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Apr-2003
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Age: 30
Posts: 5,325
Send a message via ICQ to Bartman
How is determined what mutations they are capable of? Is it just a 50/50 chance they die or not?
Thats the only thing i dont understand..is how they decide that they can or cannot mutate
__________________
Adam
Bartman is offline  
Old 12-22-03, 07:16 PM   #37 (permalink)
Member
 
CDN-Cresties's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar-2003
Location: Ontario
Age: 34
Posts: 3,999
Zoe please explain how something as complex as the the eye be created through Natural selection?

Sorry let me clarify when I say the word rapid, I dont mean over a couple of generations, i meant to say rapid in terms of geological time.
Thanks

-Steve-
__________________
Steven
CDN-Cresties is offline  
Old 12-22-03, 07:19 PM   #38 (permalink)
Member
 
CDN-Cresties's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar-2003
Location: Ontario
Age: 34
Posts: 3,999
Here is my essay that I wrote. Its a bit long but hopefully it will add to the thread


Comparing Natural Selection and Punctuated Equilibrium
The theory of evolution is one of the best-known scientific theories around. “The subject is fascinating because it attempts to answer one of the most basic human questions: Where did life, and human beings, come from? The theory of evolution proposes that life and humans arose through a natural process” (Howstuffworks). In 1959, Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species revolutionized evolutionary thought (Bowler 141). Within Origin of Species, Darwin provides the mechanism through which evolutionary change can occur-Natural Selection. Natural Selection is, “Individuals with qualities that made them better adjusted to their environments or gave them higher fitness. Because more individuals are born than survive to breed, constant winnowing of the less fit- a natural selection- should occur, leading to a population that is well adapted to the environment it inhabits. When environmental conditions change, populations require new properties to maintain their fitness. Either the survival of a sufficient number of individuals with suitable traits leads to an eventual adaptation of the population as a whole, or the population becomes extinct” (Funk & Wagnells 20). However, this essay does not only plan to discuss only Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection, it plans to compare it to another famous mechanism for evolutionary change, Stephan J Gould’s Punctuated Equilibrium. In 1972, Gould and his colleague, Niles Eldredge, proposed this idea of Punctuated change. According to this theory, “Species do in fact tend to remain stable for long periods of time and then to change relatively abruptly-or rather, to be replaced by newer and more successful forms. These sudden changes are the ‘punctuations’ in the state of equilibrium that give this concept its name” (Funk & Wagnells 24). Both theories were very influential, however they differ in the way they produce evolutionary change in how they explain the fossil record, and in the problems associated with the theories.
The theories of Natural Selection and Punctuated Equilibrium differ greatly in terms of the mode in which evolutionary change is produced. Darwin’s Natural Selection requires four fundamental aspects, V.O.S.S. (Nichols Oct 1, 2003). The first of these is Variation which, according to Darwin, is a precondition for evolutionary change. This is an empirical observation that illustrates biological individuality; all animal populations have differences of heredity and variation in the species. Without this variation, evolutionary change would not occur according to the theory of Natural Selection. The second letter of the V.O.S.S. formula is Offspring of Offspring. This states that in every generation, more offspring are born then will ever survive. This point will be drawn upon later on in the essay in terms of external influences on the theory. The third letter in the formula is Struggle for Existence. This is the result of V+O, or in other words, competition within the species. If most potential life does not survive, it creates enormous pressure to compete for the available resources. Variation within the species plays a role in sorting out the survivors who will go on to breed from those who do not survive, resulting in the genetic difference being lost. The final part of the formula is Selection. Slow gradual change takes place in an animal population if the environment is stable. Genetic traits that allow animals to survive are conservative during this time. If the environment changes in significant ways, those individuals who deviate from the norm offer a solution for survival. (Nichols Oct 1, 2003) It is also worth mentioning that, “What natural selection cannot do, is to modify the structure of one species, without giving it any advantage” (Darwin 51). Now that the mechanism for evolution under natural selection is clear, Gould’s mechanism for evolutionary change under Punctuated Equilibrium will be discussed.
According to the theory of Punctuated Equilibrium, species tend to stay the same until some “punctuation” occurs (Funk & Wagnells 24). Gould suggests that there are three different things that can cause this “punctuation,” they are: regulatory gene change, neoteny, and the Cometary Impact theory. Gould draws upon Richard Goldschmidt’s “Synthetic Theory of Evolution.” In Gould’s essay, “Return of the Hopeful Monster,” from his book “The Panda’s Thumb,” he states that, “Goldschmidt specifically invokes rate genes as a potential maker of hopeful monsters: ‘ This basis is furnished by the existence of mutants producing monstrosities of the required type and the knowledge of embryonic determination, which permits a small rate change in early embryonic processes to produce a large effect embodying considerable parts of the organism’” (Gould 192). Gould goes on further to state that, “If we do not invoke discontinuous change by small alteration in rates of development, I do not see how most major evolutionary transitions can be accomplished at all” (Gould 192). This regulatory gene change leads into the second manner in which punctuated change can occur, neoteny. In Gould’s essay, “The Child as Man’s Real Father” from his book “Ever Since Darwin” Gould states his belief that neoteny can lead to evolutionary change; “But since neoteny and ******** development are generally linked, retardation does provide a mechanism for the easy retention of any juvenile feature that suits the adult life style of descendants. In fact, juvenile features are a storehouse of potential adaptations for descendants, and they can be utilized easily if development is strongly ******** in time (Gould 68). This point was made more clearly in Professor Nichols November 5, 2003 lecture. According to this lecture, new species evolve because they retain and re-shuffle the juvenile characteristics of their ancestors. The regulatory genes represent a pattern of growth, which leads to an adult appearance in the species; the regulatory genes turn on and off at particular times. This process is most active during the maturation process. A final, and most drastic explanation for punctuated evolutionary change put forth by Gould is the Cometary Impact theory. In Gould’s essay, “ The Cosmic Dance of Siva” from the book, “The Flamingo’s Smile,” he states his belief in mass extinction as a cause of evolutionary change. The idea is that materials have collided with Earth and led to mass extinctions. Gould does have some compelling evidence for this view. First of all, “High levels of iridium in rocks at the Cretaceous Tertiary boundary provided the first solid evidence for coincidence between extraterrestrial impact and time of extinction…Iridium in surface rocks arrives largely from extraterrestrial sources-asteroids, meteorites, and comets” (Gould 440-441). Another impressive fact stated in the essay mentioned is that, “David Raup and Jack Sepkoski, working from extensive compilations of the life and death times for fossil families, found a 26-million-year periodicity in extinctions during the past 225 million years” (Gould 441) This coincides with what, “Walter Alvarez and Richard A. Muller find of periodicity, similar in timing and spacing of 28.4 million year to the Raup-Sepkoski extinction peaks, for well-dated impact craters on Earth with diameters in excess of ten kilometers” (Gould 441). To conclude this point Gould states, “If mass extinctions are so frequent, so profound in their effects, and caused fundamentally by an extraterrestrial agency so catastrophic in impact and so utterly beyond the power of organisms to anticipate, then life’s history either has an irreducible randomness or operates by new and undiscovered rules for perturbations, not by laws that regulate predictable competition during normal times” (Gould 446). The ideas proposed by Gould clearly operate in a world of stasis and are abruptly punctuated causing macro evolutionary change. It is easy to see the major difference between Natural Selection and Punctuated Equilibrium; Natural Selection is a gradual and continuous process while Punctuated Equilibrium is discontinuous.
Since the two theories are opposite to one another, can the fossil record provide any information as to which one is more accurate? First, let’s start with Natural Selection. Charles Darwin recognized the problem with this own theory in terms of the fossil record. He states, “Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?” (Darwin 75). The only answer Darwin can give is this, “I will here only state that I believe the answer mainly lies in the record being incomparably less perfect than is generally supposed; the imperfection of the record being chiefly due to organic beings not inhabiting profound depths of the sea, and to their remains being embedded and preserved to a future age only in masses of sediment sufficiently thick and extensive to withstand an enormous amount of future degradation; and such fossiliferous masses can be accumulated only where much sediment is deposited on the shallow bed of the sea, whilst it slowly subsides. These contingencies will concur only rarely, and after enormously long intervals. Whilst the bed of the sea is stationary or is rising, or when very little sediment is being deposited, there will be blanks in our geological history” (Darwin 76). The evidence for Punctuated Equilibrium in the fossil record is diametrically opposed of Natural Selection. Gould states his view on this topic in his essay “Episodic Evolutionary Change” from his book, “The Panda’s Thumb, “The history of most fossil species includes two features particularly inconsistent with gradualism: 1. Stasis. Most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking much the same, as when they disappear, morphological change is usually limited and directionless. 2. Sudden appearance. In any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and ‘fully formed’” (Gould 182). It is difficult to state that one theory has an edge over the other; it all depends on how the fossil evidence is interpreted.
With any theory, there comes criticism and problems. There are many problems and criticisms for Natural Selection. Once again Darwin acknowledges his theory’s flaw, “ Can we believe that natural selection could produce, on the one hand…on the other hand, organs of such wonderful structure, as the eye, of which we hardly as yet fully understand the inimitable perfection?” (Darwin 75). Darwin tries his best to explain how the eye came about but even he has his doubts, this is revealed when he says, “To suppose that the eye, with all it inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances…could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree” (Darwin 85). A criticism that follows Natural Selection is that it, “Bears an uncanny resemblance to the political economic theory of early capitalism as developed by the Scottish economics” (Lewontin 10). During the November 26, 2003 lecture, Professor Nichols mentioned Gould’s criticism, which wed his science with his political beliefs. Gould feared that a nuclear war would lead to mass extinction resembling that of the Cometary Impact theory. This could have been a reason why Gould took to the Cometary Impact theory; he went against his own word that one cannot draw any moral/political lessons from nature.
In light of what has been discussed, it is evident that both theories have left a major imprint on the science of Evolution. Gould is often said to be the greatest evolutionary thinker since Darwin. Both men have contributed a great deal, and their ideas will linger with us for a long time if not forever. Darwin’s theory of Natural Selection is still talked about today. In fact Gould insists that Natural Selection is still involved in the process of evolution, just not to the point where it is causing major evolutionary change (Gould 188).

WorK Cited
Bowler, Peter J. Evolution, The History of an Idea. Los Angeles: University of
California Press, 2003.
Darwin, Charles. The Origin of Species. New York: W.W Norton and Company, 1975.
Funk & Wagnells. “Evolution.” New Encyclopedia. 1985ed.
Gould, Stephan J. Dinosaur in a Haystack. New York: Harmony Books, 1995.
Gould, Stephan J. Eight Little Piggies. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1993.
Gould, Stephan J. Ever Since Darwin. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1977.
Gould, Stephan J. The Flamingo’s Smile. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1985.
Gould, Stephan J. Full House. New York: Harmony Books, 1996.
Gould, Stephan J. The Episodic Nature of Evolutionary Change. New York:W.W. Norton
and Company, 1980.
Gould Stephan J. Return of the Hopeful Monster. New York: W.W. Norton and
Company, 1980.
Howstuffworks, http://science.howstuffworks.com/evolution!.htm
Lewontin, R. C. Biology as Ideology. Toronto: House of Anansi Press, 1991.
Nichols, Christopher. Social Science. York University, Toronto, Ontario, 1 Oct, 2003.
Nichols, Christopher. Social Science. York University, Toronto, Ontario, 5 Nov, 2003.
Nichols, Christopher. Social Science. York University, Toronto, Ontario, 26 Nov, 2003.
__________________
Steven
CDN-Cresties is offline  
Old 12-22-03, 07:24 PM   #39 (permalink)
Zoe
Member
 
Zoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar-2002
Location: Ottawa
Age: 31
Posts: 3,288
Send a message via MSN to Zoe
I didn't mutate as in they all of a sudden develop a fifth leg or anything - i meant a change in the alleles within the population. It's not a 50/50 chance, but it could go either way.

http://www.exchangedlife.com/Creation/think/eye.shtml
Here ya go. The text is ambiguous at time, but some passages are interesting and plausible.

Organisms are in a constant state of flux - look at any populations from humans to fruit flies: they have adapted, perhaps slightly, in the past dozen generations. Have you ever been in a house that was built 200 years ago? You have to stoop to walk in some of them - humans have grown to be much taller. Eventually, following enough adaptations, the species will evolve into something different (assuming they don't die out for whatever reason). That happens over many, many thousands-millions of years. That seems to be what you are saying?

Zoe

Zoe
Zoe is offline  
Old 12-22-03, 07:24 PM   #40 (permalink)
Member
 
CDN-Cresties's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar-2003
Location: Ontario
Age: 34
Posts: 3,999
The blanked out words are r e t a r d e d. Also sorry about the format, it guess it lost it when I pasted it in the thread.

-Steve-
__________________
Steven
CDN-Cresties is offline  
Login to remove ads
Old 12-22-03, 07:27 PM   #41 (permalink)
Member
 
Crotalus75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov-2003
Posts: 199
Country:
The dogma goes like this DNA -> RNA -> protein

Mutation is change (errors) in the sequence of a DNA molecule that is caused by a number of factors. Some mutations can be caused by radiation (ex. UV radiation can cause bulky pyramidine dimers). Tautomeric shifts can cause bases to mispair. 5-bromouracil can mimic bases and cause mispairing. Insertions and deletions can cause an entire shift in the DNA reading frame. etc...etc....etc....

When a mutation occurs in in the germ line (a gamete) it can be passed to offspring.

When mutated DNA is transcribed into RNA it may be translated into a different sequence of amino acids (building blocks of proteins) than the original molecule was capable of coding for. These new proteins may hold a slight selective advantage for an organism and would therefore be passed on to offspring with greater frequency. It should be noted that almost all mutation is deleterious and some is neutral. Most is NOT positive or advantageous.
__________________
~ Tad Wood ~
Crotalus75 is offline  
Old 12-22-03, 07:35 PM   #42 (permalink)
Member
 
Crotalus75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov-2003
Posts: 199
Country:
To understand this jargon I recomend getting a copy of "Genetics - a conceptional approach" by Benjamin A. Pierce. This is one of the texts that we used when I took General Genetics.
__________________
~ Tad Wood ~
Crotalus75 is offline  
Old 12-23-03, 12:07 AM   #43 (permalink)
Banned
 
chas*e's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan-2003
Posts: 1,036
Country:
There are many aspects to Evolution....adaptation and natural selection are only parts of the theory
chas*e is offline  
Old 12-23-03, 12:10 AM   #44 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Mar-2003
Location: Orillia, ON
Age: 47
Posts: 460
Nice essay, Steve. I think the last sentence is perhaps the most relevant to our current debate. I believe it is fair to say that both natural selection and punctuated equilibrium theories have their place. Both are mechanisms for evolutionary change, one gradual, and one 'rapid' (in the geological sense). They are not mutually exclusive.

I don't recall much about regulatory genes, but neoteny (and it's cousin, paedomorphisis) makes sense as a mechanism for rapid change. As for cometary impact (and other sudden drastic environmental shifts), this would account for a rapid reduction in species diversity, which would then provide a wealth of unfilled niches in the environment. Since competition for resources in these niches would be reduced or eliminated, organisms would move in as fast as they could, using either existing forms, or modifications from mutations, etc. The development of new adaptations, and thus eventually new organisms, might happen more rapidly in such a scenario, but it would still be natural selection at work after the environmental shift.

Bartman- they don't decide to mutate or not. They either live to reproduce, or die. If they happen to mutate (or other forms of variation) and that happenstance makes them more likely to reproduce, then said mutation will become more common, and the organisms and offspring may survive whatever occurs.

As Tad said, almost all mutation is deleterious (bad:-)). It's not 50/50. But with enough offspring, hopefully a few will survive and reproduce, regardless of mutation or not. Well said, Tad, about how mutations in DNA cause physical changes to the body.

Jeff Hathaway
Sciensational Sssnakes!!
Jeff Hathaway is offline  
Old 12-23-03, 02:09 AM   #45 (permalink)
Member
 
Crotalus75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov-2003
Posts: 199
Country:
I agree. There are so many aspects to the evolutionary debate that science must step outside the confines of traditional darwinian dogma to fully explain all of the evidence. Very interesting to say the least. I must confess that I have only read a few snippets of Gould's work. He is definitely one of the next authors on my reading list.
__________________
~ Tad Wood ~

Last edited by Crotalus75; 12-23-03 at 02:12 AM..
Crotalus75 is offline  
Login to remove ads
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:04 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002-17, Hobby Solutions Inc.

right

SEO by vBSEO 3.1.0