Slashdot Mirror


Top 10 Evolutionary Adaptations

oneill40 writes "The New Scientist has an interesting article up listing the Top 10 most amazing things to have evolved, including sex, death, the eye, language and parasites!" From the article:"Sponges are a key example of multicellular life, an innovation that transformed living things from solitary cells into fantastically complex bodies. It was such a great move, it evolved at least 16 different times. Animals, land plants, fungi and algae all joined in." J adds: Number four, Language, got a careful look from Carl Zimmer a while back. It's Pinker vs. Chomsky, winner take all, pass the popcorn!

4 of 716 comments (clear)

  1. Re:DNA - Missing from the list by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Informative

    in bad form replying to my own post, but here's a link to the npr audio on the discovery.

    NPR STORY

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  2. Re:Language genetic vs. memetic by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 4, Informative

    Language requires very specific parts of the brain to work correctly. This has been seen in brain damaged people and children with certain birth defects. It may be very difficult if not impossible for them to learn a language, understand or speak it. This indicates that we have language-specific hardware built in. The abilities of the chimps is no surprise here - in fact, it supports the idea that we are evolved to use language, considering chimps are our closest genetic relatives. Other animals can learn human language to some degree too, and do in fact communicate amongst themselves. But really, it's a huge advantage for a group to be able to communicate within its ranks. From the altruistic warning cry to, oh I don't know, mating songs, language has had very good reasons to evolve.

    --
    Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
    Africus aut Europaeus?
  3. Re:Death? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 4, Informative
    Death? Maybe it's just me but I'd consider death an evolutionary failure.

    Immortality, now that would be a nice adaptation!

    In the short and narrow terms, death seems like a failure but globally and long term, death is necessary for the survival of the species.

    On a microscopic level death is vital to keep the whole organism healthy. The article specifically mentions cellular programmed suicide. Most of the time, cells in multicelluar bodies like ourselves commit suicide when they detect abnormalities in themselves. So far researchers have identified the gene (p53) in humans that directs this behavior. Cancer is the result when p53 fails to work correctly.

    Macroscopically, death and evolution are mutually intertwined. The creatures with the most desirable traits can direct the path of the species with survival. Less desirable genes are removed from the population by death. In addition to gene and trait selection, death keeps populations healthy by keeping populations in check. Death ensures that limited resources are not depleted.

    Imagine if every human that ever died of simple old age was still around today. I don't think the Earth could support that many humans. Because we at the top of the food chain, there are few if any predators that keep our population in check. We could easily deplete all the food, space, water, etc.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  4. Re:More from Carl Zimmer: Resurrecting the Genome by shirai · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've been trying to find the "Last Stop" for an argument for evolution for quite some time. I finally found this amazing article: 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution.

    I'm sure many of you (who wanted to know anyways) have come across this but this is the cat's meow for evolutionary arguments. It is designed to be easy to read, but it does not pander to the lowest common denominator (in fact far from it).

    If you haven't read it, you WILL learn something new.

    --
    Sunny

    Be my Friend