Evolution in Action: Birth of New Species Witnessed by Scientists

by Elsewhere 39 Replies latest jw friends

  • Elsewhere
    Elsewhere

    What more do the creationists want?

    http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/11/speciation-in-action/

    darwinfinches2

    finches2

    On one of the Galapagos islands whose finches shaped the theories of a young Charles Darwin, biologists have witnessed that elusive moment when a single species splits in two.

    In many ways, the split followed predictable patterns, requiring a hybrid newcomer who’d already taken baby steps down a new evolutionary path. But playing an unexpected part was chance, and the newcomer singing his own special song.

    This miniature evolutionary saga is described in a paper published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences . It’s authored by Peter and Rosemary Grant, a husband-and-wife team who have spent much of the last 36 years studying a group of bird species known collectively asDarwin’s finches.

    The finches — or, technically, tanagers — have adapted to the conditions of each island in the Galapagos, and they provided Darwin with a clear snapshot of evolutionary divergence when he sailed there on the HMS Beagle. The Grants have pushed that work further, with decades of painstaking observations providing a real-time record of evolution in action. In the PNAS paper, they describe something Darwin could only have dreamed of watching: the birth of a new species.

    The species’ forefather was a medium ground finch, orGeospiza fortis, who flew from a neighboring island to the Grants’ island of Daphne Major, and into their nets, in 1981. He “was unusually large, especially in beak width, sang an unusual song” and had a few gene variants that could be traced to another finch species, they wrote. This exotic stranger soon found a mate, who also happened to have a few hybrid genes. The happy couple had five sons.

    In the tradition of finches, for whom songs are passed from father to son and used to serenade potential mates, the sons learned their immigrant father’s tunes. But their father’s vocalizations were strange: he’d tried to mimick the natives, but accidentally introduced new notes and inflections, like a person who learns a song in a language he doesn’t understand.

    These tunes set the sons apart, as did their unusual size. Though they found mates, it may only have taken a couple generations for the new lineage to ignore — or be ignored by — local finches, and breed only with each other. The Grants couldn’t tell for certain when this started, but they were certain after four generations, when a drought struck the island, killing all but a single brother and sister. They mated with each other, and their children did the same.

    No exact rule exists for deciding when a group of animals constitutes a separate species. That question “is rarely if ever asked,” as speciation isn’t something that scientists have been fortunate enough to watch at the precise moment of divergence, except in bacteria and other simple creatures. But after at least three generations of reproductive isolation, the Grants felt comfortable in designating the new lineage as an incipient species.

    The future of the species is far from certain. It’s possible that they’ll be out-competed by other finches on the island. Their initial gene pool may contain flaws that will be magnified with time. A chance disaster could wipe them out. The birds might even return to the fold of their parent species, and merge with them through interbreeding.

    But whatever happens, their legacy will remain: New species can emerge very quickly — and sometimes all it takes is a song.

    Images: 1) An example of Daphne Major’s native medium ground finches (left), differs from the new species’ original newcomer (right).
    2) Top to bottom: A to F show successive generations of the hybrids, which now mate only with each other.

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog
    No exact rule exists for deciding when a group of animals constitutes a separate species.

    That's evolution in action... a finch became a finch.

  • TD
    TD

    It's not evolution until a Tanager turns into a Tangerine

  • nicolaou
    nicolaou
    That's evolution in action... a finch became a finch.

    You just don't get it do you DD?

  • TheClarinetist
    TheClarinetist

    There is an exact rule. It is considered a different species if the offspring of the two similar animals is not viable, similar to a mule. As far as I know, the Galapagos finches are actually a subspecies of the same species of Finch.

    (As far as the rule is concerned, that is almost verbatim what was taught in my college Biology class I took last sememster. The thing about the finches I heard second hand and do NOT consider it a reputible source)

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog

    nic

    You just don't get it do you DD?

    Oh I get it now.

    But after at least three generations of reproductive isolation, the Grants felt comfortable in designating the new lineage as an incipient species

    If we except this new three generation rule maybe "we" are of different species. I'm sure that's why you are so much smarter than I.

  • TheClarinetist
    TheClarinetist

    Its an easily testable hypothesis. Force them to breed in a laboratory environment. IF the child can interbreed, they're the same species.

  • cantleave
    cantleave

    Very interesting but at this point in time it is still a ground finch, in the same way my bull terrier is still a dog, even though he looks completely different to my next door neighbour's pekenese.

  • TD
    TD
    There is an exact rule. It is considered a different species if the offspring of the two similar animals is not viable, similar to a mule.

    Total infertility is true reproductive isolation, (Inability to even produce a zygote) which is actually closer to what Creationists mean with the term, "Kind" than it is to what Biologists mean when they designate a breeding group as a separate species

    Many separate recognized species are not actually reproductively isolated to that extent.

    Lions and Tigers can be bred to produce "Ligers" or "Tygons." (Lion/Tiger and Tiger/Lion respectively) Other pairings include Leopard/Lion, Lynx/Bobcat, Puma/Leopard, Polar Bear/Brown Bear, Polar Bear/Kodiak Bear, Forest/Savannah African Elephants, Blue/Black Wildebeast, Eland/Kudu, Masai/Rothschild's Giraffe, Harp/Hooded Seal --the list of interspecies hybrids is a very long one.

    A Llama/Camel cross (By artificial insemination) produces the "Cama" --a creature with the short ears and long tail of the camel, no hump and the Llama's cloven hoves. Yet the Camel and Llama are not only entirely different species, they belong to different genera as well.

    Sheep have 54 chromosomes and Goats have 60. Crosses between sheep and goats will develop to the point of birth, but they are usually stillborn, although there have been documented exceptions where live offspring were produced. The resultant creature, which has long, goat-like legs and a heavy sheep-like body has 57 chromosomes

    Although a cross between the Bison and Domestic Cattle will produce healthy, fertile offspring, crossing the Water Buffalo with Domestic Cattle will produce a living Zygote, (Which means the Sperm and Egg did manage to successfully combine) but the Zygote dies when it splits beyond eight cells.

  • TheClarinetist
    TheClarinetist

    I wasn't referring to inability to produce a zygote, but inability of the child to itself produce a child... Although I've heard that ligers can occasionally breed with tigers. :-/ Bleh!

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit