• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

How Did It Evolve?

Johnny Pneumatic

Master Poster
Joined
Oct 15, 2003
Messages
2,088
The thread title may look trollish but I hope you know me well enough to know thats not what I'm doing here. Any hoo, I have a few questions about how certain adaptations evolved. Basicaly what I'm wanting is what could be workable intermediate steps in the evolution of venus fly trap plants, turtle shells, gecko setae, electric eel's muscle blocks and woodpeckers.
 
SkepticJ said:
The thread title may look trollish but I hope you know me well enough to know thats not what I'm doing here. Any hoo, I have a few questions about how certain adaptations evolved. Basicaly what I'm wanting is what could be workable intermediate steps in the evolution of venus fly trap plants, turtle shells, gecko setae, electric eel's muscle blocks and woodpeckers.

Some of these are addressed in better detail than I ever could in Richard Dawkins new book, _The Ancestor's Tale._ Which I just finished last night and strongly recommend.

But for many of these, I don't see what the issue is. For example,
turtle shells are simply an extension of the backbone and ribcage to produce a protective covering, yes? Obviously, partial armor is better than none, but not as good as total. What blindingly-obvious anatomical feature am I missing?
 
The Blind Watchmaker and Climbing Mount Improbable by Dawkins are also good at describing evolutinary processes in general. I don't recall these specific features you mentioned but it gives a good overall picture.
 
I saw something in Science a few months back on turtle shell:

Pennisi,Elizabeth (2004): Neural beginnings for the turtle's shell. Science 303(5660), 951.
January 2004 meeting of the Society for Integrative & Comparative Biology in New Orleans; A minor change in development may have led to rapid evolution of turtle shell, based on bits and pieces of developmental program already there.
 
SkepticJ said:
woodpeckers
What's surprising about woodpeckers? Seems like a perfectly reasonable extrapolation for a tree-dwelling insectovore with a beak...
 
SkepticJ said:
Any hoo, I have a few questions about how certain adaptations evolved. Basicaly what I'm wanting is what could be workable intermediate steps in the evolution of venus fly trap plants, turtle shells, gecko setae, electric eel's muscle blocks and woodpeckers.
I've always wondered the same thing about the intermediate evolutionary steps of the wings of the flying dinosaurs, the pterodactyl and pteranodan. It looks like they would have been at a tremendous survival disadvantage flopping along for millions of years until they developed the aerodynamics to finally take off and say Hey.. these things are good for something after all.
 
Re: Re: How Did It Evolve?

Bleever said:
I've always wondered the same thing about the intermediate evolutionary steps of the wings of the flying dinosaurs, the pterodactyl and pteranodan. It looks like they would have been at a tremendous survival disadvantage flopping along for millions of years until they developed the aerodynamics to finally take off and say Hey.. these things are good for something after all.
Wings and forelimbs are homologous on all flying vertabrates. Structures don't start out evolving for the particular purpose they end up with; they start out with one function and evolve to perform a different function.

You probably know what a flying squirrel is, right? It's basically an animal with gliding flaps behind its forelimbs. Why is so hard to imagine these slowly becoming more and more specialized for gliding and flying?
 
While turtles start out in the fossil record with their shells more or less fully developed (around the Triassic IIRC), there are many other reptile lineages that show intermediate steps in armor development.

The pareiasaurs, which may be distant turtle relatives (or then again, maybe not), were the dominant large herbivores throughout the late Permian. Some forms lacked armor, but near the end of the late Permian two new families of predators took over that necessitated the evolution of heavy protection.

The gorgonopsids and therocephalians, which really weren't hugely different, were both products of rather gradual predator evolution. Compared to the previously dominant predator groups, both the therocephalians and gorgonopsids were faster and smaller. In fact, the gorgonopsids are often cited as the first terrestrial predators capable of a quick trot, so while their anatomy was not radicaly different from their parent groups, they were quite a bit more effective. In addition to greater mobility, both gorgonopsids and therocephalians have big canine teeth. In some gorgonopsids, especially species like Inostrancevia the canines were comperable to the teeth of machairodonts that would stalk the Tertiary and Quaternary. It is thought that both gorgonopsids and therocephalians had elevated metabolic rates, and therefore greater appetites, and some therocephalian remains seem to indicate certain species were experimenting with venom (which would make them the first vertebrates to have done so).

In short, the pareiasaurs were suddenly up against stiff enemies. Some pareiasaurs evolved more and more elaborate armor plating, and suprise suprise, the larger gorgonopsids evolved longer fangs. It's possible that the thicker and more interlocking pareiasaur armor gave rise to turtles:

parei.skel.dor.gif


But then again, the armor may have just evolved in parallel. Still, gives you an idea of what might have caused it.


Edit

This is a gorgonopsian, in this case Dixeya. Quite a mean hombre, gives you an idea of why the pareiasaurs needed armour so badly.
Theriodont%20jaw.gif
 
Re: Re: How Did It Evolve?

Bleever said:
I've always wondered the same thing about the intermediate evolutionary steps of the wings of the flying dinosaurs, the pterodactyl and pteranodan. It looks like they would have been at a tremendous survival disadvantage flopping along for millions of years until they developed the aerodynamics to finally take off and say Hey.. these things are good for something after all.

It isn't Talk Origins but
this explained it to me about a year ago.
 
DangerousBeliefs said:
How did the ants and the tree evolve into such a close, well-fitting pair?
Possibly the same way that people in the developed world may evolve to be dependent on junk food:

- It starts because it's convenient source of calories
- Then you can't be bothered to go anywhere else
- Then you loose the ability to cook for yourself
- If this goes on for a few generations there may be no way back

There are pockets of people where this has already taken place.
 
Zombified said:
Wings and forelimbs are homologous on all flying vertabrates.

Ahem

OK, OK, it doesn't fly any more than a dermopteran, but I find it interesting nonetheless. Sharovopteryx was close the the ancestry of pterosaurs too, but probably had nothing to do with the evolution of their flight. Seems like the whole family was just itching to get airborne!
 
neutrino_cannon said:
Ahem

OK, OK, it doesn't fly any more than a dermopteran, but I find it interesting nonetheless. Sharovopteryx was close the the ancestry of pterosaurs too, but probably had nothing to do with the evolution of their flight. Seems like the whole family was just itching to get airborne!
A delta-wing lizard? Cool!

Back on the "How did it evolve?" topic, I find the co-adaptions most fascinating - look up figs and wasps for a story to really boggle the mind. Don't ask me to descibe the complex relationship between fig, wasps and parasites because it's far too convoluted for my meagre powers of recollection or description (Dawkins discusses them in the final chapter of "Climbing Mount Improbable").
Ants and acacia trees are straightforward in comparison.
 

Back
Top Bottom