Birth of new species witnessed by scientists
source: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/11/speciation-in-action/?npu=1&mbid=yhp
-
-
- ibrake4rappers13
- added this
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 as Darwin’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, or Geospiza 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.
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/11/speciation-in-action/?npu=1&mbid=y...
-
- groups:
- Community, Science, Science & Nature
-
- tags:
- New Species
-
-
BoomChaka
-
OK it seems some people dont get it so i thought id post a simplification of the article and how it applies to evolution.
the "birth" of a species occurs when two populations become unable to interbreed with each other. In this case the "new" birds have different songs and are larger than the other finches. This forces them to breed only with their own kind.
This is NOT the "Birth of a species" because if you were physically put a sperm and an egg together from each "species", the baby would be healthy.
It does set the stage for microevolution within two species. gradual adaptations pile up and they branch apart. at some point the two species would be genetically incompatible, THAT would be the "Birth" of a species.
- 2 years ago
-
BoomChaka
-
-
annazoe
-
what?? animals can't change over time? of course they do!
- 2 years ago
-
annazoe
-
-
royulery
-
evolution works on the smallest scale over impossibly long periods of time. one gene is damaged by radiation, that damage if it doesn't kill the organism and helps it's survival, maybe passed on. evolution can't take big jumps, to turn a bird into a man would require an uncountable number of steps. however if geneticists did it with a plan in mind they could save a few hundred million years and they have a head start. i read in the local paper that the beak gene in chickens was found, so the geneticists shut it off and had chickens with teeth. dinosaur type teeth...........................................( if you have to run and reread your holy book, i understand, i'll wait for you, you poor thing ) the conical raptor style teeth isn't that amazing considering that many dinosaurs had bird beaks, like the triceratops. so if you have ever wondered what a dinosaur tastes like, it tastes like chicken.
- 2 years ago
-
royulery
-
-
fun_size
-
Cool. So wheres data that disproves evolution? I always hear about it but all i ever see is proof in favor of evolution.
- 2 years ago
-
fun_size
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
fun_size:
Do you really change your mind on something that's engraved? Prove that that's even remotely possible. Otherwise it's not worth showing or discussing whether or not this is true. It's like religious beliefs.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
resolute
-
fun_size:
This can only be considered evolution in species, not genus. The bird was a bird before, not a turtle. There is no evolution in genus.
- 2 years ago
-
resolute
-
-
H3ADLINE
-
fun_size:
Oh, but it's there. You just can't see it. You have to have faith in the evidence against evolution, and then you'll know. ;)
- 2 years ago
-
H3ADLINE
-
-
asherp
-
Awesome! The delineation of a higher order species is rarely seen in the span of a human lifetime.
Whenever talking with evolution deniers, I always use the finches of the Galapagos as an example:
1) Variation occurs in a species in beak size.
2) Big beaked birds eat larger seeds.
3) Drought kills off smaller seeded plants for a generation.
4) Small beaked birds die off.
5) Big beaked birds live on.
6) Species as a whole has larger beaks.That's evolution in a nutshell and people find it impossible to deny.
- 2 years ago
-
asherp
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
asherp:
All I say is that those birds already existed. Science is just not observant.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
resolute
-
asherp:
Evolutionists will never see evolution in genus because it does not exist. They have to make it possible by adding the element of time,
- 2 years ago
-
resolute
-
-
neonbunny
-
asherp:
... pretty much sums it up resolute. I'm usually a nice guy, but your ignorant arguments truly blow my mind.
- 2 years ago
-
neonbunny
-
-
ColossalView
-
Fascinating story.
- 2 years ago
-
ColossalView
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
No one can have a flawed view of evolution when it itself is flawed.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
ii386
-
J_Jammer:
elaborate...
- 2 years ago
-
ii386
-
-
H3ADLINE
-
J_Jammer:
Hey, it's not nice to pick on natural processes like that. Evolution can't help but operate the way it does. Stop being a perfectionist about it.
- 2 years ago
-
H3ADLINE
-
-
resolute
-
Can you really call it evolution since it only applies to the species like the article states and not the genus. Evolution would be where one genus becomes a different genus altogether. Or maybe our understanding of evolution is flawed.
- 2 years ago
-
resolute
-
-
neonbunny
-
resolute:
Your understanding of evolution is flawed. Evolution above the species level (genera, orders, etc.) is simply speciation expanded over a much longer period of time, with increasing differences. It's all evolution, it's just that major differences take a LOT of time.
- 2 years ago
-
neonbunny
-
-
resolute
-
resolute:
There are not enough skeletons on earth to prove that every genus has evolved from another genus no matter how much time to add to the equation, the science is not there.
- 2 years ago
-
resolute
-
-
neonbunny
-
resolute:
I don't have time for this. Believe what you want but please stop spreading your flawed views of evolution because your obviously not qualified to be debating it.
- 2 years ago
-
neonbunny
-
-
H3ADLINE
-
resolute:
You either recognize that evolution takes place or you don't. Unless you can prove why small mutations can't add up over time to make dramatic differences, hiding behind this notion that speciation is completely different from large scale phenomena is self-contradicting. You get to large scale change by speciation, not magical leaps. Evolution takes place on the level of individual organisms. Genus is word for classifying a group of similar organisms. It's not something that can evolve. Organisms like these finches, however, can and do evolve. Deal with it.
- 2 years ago
-
H3ADLINE
-
-
hitech67
-
That's not evolution...it's speciation. If the bird became a human, then I would call it evolution.
- 2 years ago
-
hitech67
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
hitech67:
That's the strangest evolution I've ever heard of...
- 2 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
resolute
-
hitech67:
Exactly. Now if only everyone understood this simple concept.
- 2 years ago
-
resolute
-
-
neonbunny
-
hitech67:
"If the bird became a human, then I would call it evolution."
Uhh... what?
"That's not evolution...it's speciation."
lol, I have news for you: Speciation is part of evolution.
- 2 years ago
-
neonbunny
-
-
H3ADLINE
-
hitech67:
Speciation IS evolution. FAIL.
- 2 years ago
-
H3ADLINE
-
-
resolute
- This comment was removed by its owner.
-
resolute
-
-
neonbunny
-
resolute:
Wtf? Let me get this straight, there can be some evolution but not too much? Stop talking.
- 2 years ago
-
neonbunny
-
-
resolute
-
You can have evolution in species, but not in genus. God made everything after it's kind-genus-and it reproduces to produce one of its kind. But within its kind there can be evolution.
- 2 years ago
-
resolute
-
-
H3ADLINE
-
resolute:
Can you prove any of that, or should we just take your word for it?
There is no such thing as "evolution in genus" because genus is a category for classifying organisms. It doesn't have genes or offspring. Organisms, on the other hand, do have those qualities, and the small mutations we can view within our lifetime accumulate to make dramatic differences over a period of time. Unless you can explain why genetic mutations cannot add up over time to form unique organisms, admitting to speciation is admitting to the mechanism of evolution. Your fixation on seeing radical changes in one generation is simply a way of justifying your denial. Evolution does not create magical changes. Just small modifications that add up over time.
- 2 years ago
-
H3ADLINE
-
-
resolute
-
resolute:
I think most of the argument on both sides is just semantics and misunderstanding.
Evolutionists see scientific changes and I don't think Creationists would deny that. If there is no evolution in genus, which is what Creationists are trying to say (at least what I am saying), what's the problem? - 2 years ago
-
resolute
-
-
bansheewail
-
Sarah Palin told me that God lives in Ecuador. He changed the finches, duh.
- 2 years ago
-
bansheewail
-
-
ankab
-
Ibrake4rappers13 what a splendid post. You mean you give rappers a break. Fight the illiterates.*****
- 2 years ago
-
ankab
-
-
ibrake4rappers13
-
ankab:
lol this was my first email adress when i got started on the internet... i just couldnt think of anything else personally i dont like rap very much anymore i perfer alternative rock
- 2 years ago
-
ibrake4rappers13
-
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
AWESOME! Featured in the Science Group (http://current.com/groups/science/) because it's one of the coolest stories I've heard in a long time! Thanks for posting, this is quite excellent!
- 2 years ago
-
DeliaTheArtist
-
-
ibrake4rappers13
-
DeliaTheArtist:
posted it just for you Delia
- 2 years ago
-
ibrake4rappers13
-
-
CalgarC
-
those crazy people in the math department were right... evolution does exist :D lol
i have even more pride in being an atheist now :D - 2 years ago
-
CalgarC
-
-
Minus5scenePoints
-
That's so awesome!!!
- 2 years ago
-
Minus5scenePoints
-
-
ibrake4rappers13
-
i posted this and i still believe God created the universe
- 2 years ago
-
ibrake4rappers13
-
-
H3ADLINE
-
ibrake4rappers13:
congratulations?
- 2 years ago
-
H3ADLINE
-
-
ibrake4rappers13
-
ibrake4rappers13:
@alexandrek
- 2 years ago
-
ibrake4rappers13
-
-
EmperorThan
-
ibrake4rappers13:
But, might I ask. Do you believe in a 'human brained', 'human conscious', 'in our image' God? Or do you believe in a long and completely comprehensive mathematical equation that itself represent the 'mind of God'? (ie: M-Theory)
Cus the latter is what I believe, and what I designate as God or the Mind of God.
- 2 years ago
-
EmperorThan
-
-
H3ADLINE
-
ibrake4rappers13:
Ah, I see what you were getting at. Still, I think you may have misunderstood alexandrek's position. I'm almost certain he's referring to creationists in the biological sense (god x created all life at a given time and therefore evolution is wrong), not the cosmological (god x created the universe/set it in motion/fine tuned it, etc).
- 2 years ago
-
H3ADLINE
-
-
retro_Syl
-
ibrake4rappers13:
Which one?
- 2 years ago
-
retro_Syl
-
-
ibrake4rappers13
-
ibrake4rappers13:
"All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right. God uses it to prepare and equip his people to do every good work."
2 Timothy 3:16,17
- 2 years ago
-
ibrake4rappers13
-
-
EmperorThan
-
*phew* Good thing I don't believe in evolution.
- 2 years ago
-
EmperorThan
-
-
Hunnter
-
EmperorThan:
Going from your other post, you do realize that M-Theory, or rather, String Theory explains exactly this, right?
It is a theory of everything designed from ideas like this.And you can't really deny that random mutations do happen, it is a scientific plain and simple fact that has been observed countless times. You could watch it yourself with some bacteria and a food source as they evolve over time.
- 2 years ago
-
Hunnter
-
-
royulery
-
this is god evolving.
- 2 years ago
-
royulery
-
-
Elemental226
-
Fantastic! This is so exciting. Thanks finches, and good luck you off-key little bastards. :)
- 2 years ago
-
Elemental226
-
-
H3ADLINE
-
Witnessing the process of evolution in action always fills me with a sense of wonder about the ongoing creation of new life. In a universe filled with so much decay and destruction, I feel lucky to exist in this small pocket of the cosmos where regeneration and rebirth are all around us.
- 2 years ago
-
H3ADLINE
-
-
alexandrek [removed]
- This comment was removed by its owner.
-
alexandrek [removed]
-
-
CalPal
-
alexandrek:
durh, god intended for that to happen... all his divine plan, stop trying to prove the wrong.
:P
- 2 years ago
-
CalPal
-
-
neonbunny
-
alexandrek:
God put these birds here to test our faith, just like the dinosaurs LOL
- 2 years ago
-
neonbunny
-
-
BoomChaka
-
....and that was the day when everyone finally believed in evolution
- 2 years ago
-
BoomChaka
-
-
tangibleparadox
-
BoomChaka:
i wish.
- 2 years ago
-
tangibleparadox
-
-
H3ADLINE
-
BoomChaka:
Unfortunately, people reject evolution because of religious prejudice, so no amount of evidence or logic would ever change their mind.
- 2 years ago
-
H3ADLINE
-
-
neonbunny
-
BoomChaka:
^ and its that sad fact that pisses me off the most, of all the things that possibly could
- 2 years ago
-
neonbunny
-
-
artemis6
-
Wow . Great story . Reminded me of the bible , for some reason .
- 2 years ago
-
artemis6
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
ibrake4rappers13:
I"m going to post human noses and prove the same thing.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
Augusten
-
ibrake4rappers13:
Maybe I misunderstood what Jammer is saying? But human noses -are- indicative of adaptation.
- 2 years ago
-
Augusten
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
ibrake4rappers13:
Or a botched nose job.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
asherp
-
ibrake4rappers13:
Yes J_Jammer, because birds have rhinoplasticians.
- 2 years ago
-
asherp
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
ibrake4rappers13:
And his name is Dr. Evolution.
As we can see that just because the bill is different (and they can't seem to find this anywhere else on the plant---same birds....same place) so different....in little ways that it means gradual change. Like Obama.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
ibrake4rappers13:
It's the way of that area. Evolution happens so fast when a plastic surgeon is around.
- 2 years ago
-
J_Jammer [removed]
-
-
BoomChaka
-
ibrake4rappers13:
no offense but appearences dont prove anything. there are many instances of completely unrelated animals evolving to the same form.
- 2 years ago
-
BoomChaka
-
-
ankab
-
ibrake4rappers13:
thanx for the update on your musical tastes. You still brake4rappers I hope? RSVP
- 2 years ago
-
ankab
