Female Sharks Can Reproduce Alone

mikesd81 writes "The Washington Post has an article about a team of American and Irish researchers that have discovered that some female sharks can reproduce without having sex, the first time that scientists have found the unusual capacity in such an ancient vertebrate species. Their report concludes that sharks can reproduce asexually through the process known as parthenogenesis (the growth and development of an embryo or seed without fertilization by a male). Scientists started investigating after a female hammerhead shark was mysteriously born at Omaha's Henry Doorly Zoo in a tank that housed 3 female sharks. It was originally thought one had stored sperm from a male shark before fertilizing an egg. However, baby shark's genetic makeup perfectly matched one of the females in the tank, with no sign of a male parent."

Comments

Sigh.

[grub]

Female Sharks Can Reproduce Alone

If male sharks had ST:TNG on DVD they'd be indistinguisable from human male geeks.

Necessary improvement

[6Yankee]

They were forced to evolve this ability after all the males were killed in frickin' laser accidents during mating attempts.

Re:Necessary improvement

[sherms]

So does this mean attorneys will be able to reproduce without sex soon?

Re:Necessary improvement

[__aaclcg7560]

You mean giving birth to frivolous lawsuits isn't enough?

Re:Necessary improvement

[iamacat]

You missed two thousand years of history. Jesus was a lawyer's son with XX-male genotype. He was famous for writing laws that everyone can interpret as they wish.

Re:Necessary improvement

[stonedcat]

So..... Mary was a female shark?

All the geeks ...

[eck011219]

... at splashdot.org were just ruled obsolete. Slashdotters, beware ... we're next!

Note to self...

[Steve--Balllmer]

don't clone dinosaurs using shark DNA.

Womyn rejoice!

[R2.0]

Finally, proof that Mother Nature never intended males to exist at all.

Re:Womyn rejoice!

[garett_spencley]

I realize that was intended as a joke, and I am not an evolutionary biologist, but wouldn't this type of reproduction completely eliminate the possibility for evolution ?

I don't mean to imply that this is evidence contradicting the occurrence of evolution, just that if animals were to reproduce asexually, and thus essentially be clones of their parent, then evolution is not possible for that particular species ?

So what are the benefits ?

Re:Womyn rejoice!

[Rycross]

No, it wouldn't eliminate it. Its more accurate to say it would slow evolution. After all you'll still get mutations, and you'll still get selection from the environment. It just lowers the diversity and a big selection pressure (getting chosen as a mate). There was a time when asexual reproduction was the norm (bacteria, single-celled life forms), and you can see for yourself the result of that.

Maintenance payments

[Dude McDude]

I bet this bitch shark names an innocent male as the father, and the courts force him to pay $2000 in maintenance every month! Fuck!

That's why they keep blowing me off in bars

[jfengel]

"She must be a dyke," I'd say.

"No, that's just wishful thinking," my wingman tells me. "Maybe you should change your socks more often."

Shows him!

Parthenogenesis does not create a clone

[Anonymous Coward]

the baby should not have been genetically identical to anything in the tank unless its mother was also a parthenogen. parthenogenesis creates a homozygotic offspring that can have any random mix of the two chromosomes the mother carries for each pair. so if the mother has AB, the parthenogenic offspring can have either AA or BB, which is not identical to the mother since the mother has AB. the only way it can be identical is if the mother is also homozygotic and therefore a parthenogen.

Re:Parthenogenesis does not create a clone

[ozborn]

determined that a byproduct formed when sharks produce eggs, known as a sister polar body, had fused with an unfertilized egg to produce the baby shark, whose DNA had only half as much genetic variability as the mother.

You've misread the article (which in fairness was not precisely written) and you're misunderstanding how parthogenesis is working here. The article claims only that the offspring is a perfect genetic "match" for the mom, not that it is identical to the mom since it also says the offspring has half the variability. What this means is the genetic test they did not pick up any polymorphisms not found in the mother. That's what they mean by "identical match".

Also parthogenesis does not create homozygotic offspring (although given enough generations it will), the immediate offspring is a result of a fusion event between 2 products of meiosis - the egg and one of the polar bodies. Thus the offspring will have a different genetic makeup to the mother. In particular half (on average) of the mother's heterozygous loci will become homozygous in the offspring. Thus the offspring has half the genetic variability.

This has potentially bad consequences because of the # of recessive lethal alleles the average organisms carry. Think of parthogenesis as the worst form of incest possible.

Re:Obligatory

[Goobermunch]

No, you shouldn't. Hermaphrodism is the presence of sex organs for both genders. These sharks are all female. They just happen to be able to parthenogenically reproduce.

--AC

Big Deal

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife does this

Not sure why the kids are black tho

A virgin birth after all

[smooth wombat]

Now we know how mankind really evolved. First there was the virgin birth, then we crawled out of the sea and after a few millenia, started to walk upright.

Er wait, I'm confused.

On Henry Doorly

[ender81b]

Just a quick note, if you are ever in the Omaha, Nebraska area definitely stop by Henry Doorly Zoo. It's probably the nation's second best zoo behind San Diego's, and the shark tunnel is fantastic. As are the penguins, and the desert dome, and indoor jungle, and... A few winters ago we went to the Zoo and the place was deserted. Was able to just lay down in the Shark Tunnel and watch the sharks swim overhead for about a half hour with no one coming down. Was fantastic. At any rate, also -- as far as the article goes -- I wish someone would have some more explanation for how this works. Kindof freaky.

The Immaculate

[poor_boi]

They should name the baby shark "Jesus." I think that would be kind of funny.

Re:Obligatory

[iggymanz]

I for one welcome our immaculately conceived virgin-born shark messiah overlords

Great Whites?

[JRGhaddar]

This is actually really interesting, and makes a lot of sense. Shark's genetics haven't evolved that much from its ancient relatives so this reproduction method would definitely limit variations. But I am curious as to if this is how the great white reproduces. Very little is known about the great whites breeding habits. One of the prevailing theories centers around whale carcasses.

So..

[DeeVeeAnt]

Nobody jumped the shark then?

Sharks....

[curecollector]

...can go fuck themselves.

MOD PARENT UP

[Scooter's_dad]

For clearing up a common mis-"conception."

And for not making a lame joke about parthenogenesis like I just did.

Re:asexual reproduction-Obligatory Wargames Quote

[protolith]

Mr. Liggett: Alright, Lightman. Maybe you could tell us who first suggested the idea of reproduction without sex.

David Lightman: Umm... Your wife?

Mr. Liggett: Get out, Lightman. Get out.

"And who can tell me"

[TheDarkener]

Teacher: "...And who can tell me the first person to suggest the idea of reproduction without sex?"

Ferris: "Uhm...Your wife?"

Bueller? Bueller?

Re:"And who can tell me"

[Anonymous Coward]

Bueller? Wasn't that War Games?

Right actor, wrong movie?

Yes and no

[ciaohound]

By not jumping the shark, the male shark has finally jumped the shark.

Re:Obligatory

[Delirium Tremens]

I for one welcome our immaculately conceived virgin-born shark messiah overladies

Re:Shark School

[Abcd1234]

Wow... a few commonly known facts and some "magic" pseudoscience and baseless speculation, and you get a +5 insightful... nice work!

Re:Obligatory

[MrNaz]

No he did not. He got it wrong, and so did Wikipedia. When an object or idea is "conceived" it is called into existence. A person is conceived by the meeting of a sperm and an ovum.

The phrase "the conception of Mary" refers to the event that calls Mary into existence, that is the conception of Mary by her mother and father. It should say "the conception by Mary of Jesus", although that would have all kinds of other implications as, according to the belief, it was God who conceived Jesus, not actually Mary. To be correct syntactically and to be true to the story, I'd say "The miraculous conception of Jesus within Mary".

This is a very commonly misused active tense for the verb conception, but it becomes clear when you think of it from the point of view that "the conception of a person" refers to the point at which that person was called into existence.

Female Sharks Can Reproduce Alone

[mollog]

Female Sharks Can Reproduce Alone
So you've met my ex-wife?

Seriously, imagine the shark husbands; "That's not my pup. Who's the father???"

Or trying to explain this to your parents; "But Mom, I didn't. Really Mom."

And now the quotes, "A female shark needs a male shark, like a flounder needs a bicycle." - "All he's good for is opening jars and lifting heavy things." - "Not tonight, honey. I'm already stuffed."

In some ways, it would suck to be a male shark.