Reply With Quote
you need to dangle a kid in front of that.
Restless Creatures: The Story of Life in Ten Movements
Matt Wilkinson Basic: 2016.
ISBN: 9780465065721
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...l/530416a.htmlIt would be hard to find a more companionable guide to the marvels of locomotory evolution than Matt Wilkinson. In Restless Creatures, the zoologist and writer rehearses twice-told tales of animals becoming bilateral, exiting the sea for the land and evolving flight, but makes them fresh. These are wonderfully adept and informed explanations of locomotory modes — whether in birds, gliding snakes, eels, sharks or a host of fossil vertebrates — and there is not a single vignette that I failed to learn something from. His prose is knowing and wonky enough to sound as if it comes from the reincarnation of that senior lecturer you had who knew too much for most of the undergraduates, but was hip and amusing out of class.
Wilkinson's thesis is that locomotion drives the evolution of all other features. This is laid out in his introductory chapter, which begins by insulting most people with religious sensibilities: “Righteousness apparently requires that we take everything for granted.” He then immediately takes natural selection for granted, declaring that “living things are as they are largely as a result of the process of adaptation”. But he provides no demonstration of this, making it seem as if the only difference between the world views of science and religion is taste, because the believers of neither feel a need to test it.
Wilkinson does modify the claim that natural selection answers all questions about life by writing that it is only “sort of true”, because it neglects the effects of mutations and the environment. But this is a 1960s view of evolution, of the kind propounded by Ernst Mayr. Yes, natural selection, mutation and environment are important. But there are also the inherited constraints of development, material properties and other functions of organisms, such as metabolism and reproduction, which are not necessarily optimized by natural selection. Sometimes they even work against it. The pea 's tail, for example, has long been thought (perhaps erroneously) to be a disadvantage in escaping predators quickly. The idea that the need for some form of locomotion has driven the whole evolution of plants and animals is a risky conceit.
But a deeper problem pervades Restless Creatures. About 40 years ago, evolutionary biologists such as Niles Eldredge and Joel Cracraft began to set hypotheses about the evolution of major features in phylogenetic context. Defining and dissecting an adaptation's components and then mapping them on an independently derived tree of relationships help us to visualize the sequence in which these traits arose, and therefore to test ideas of how functions evolved. We know that to fly, an animal does not need hollow bones or a perching foot. But it does need a wing capable of generating a specific kind of stroke, and the energetic and neuromuscular capacity to sustain flight. If you can work out in what sequence these traits appeared on a phylogenetic tree of the first members of a group, then your ideas about how flight evolved can become more explicit and testable.
you need to dangle a kid in front of that.
I need 230 pages so....
Oh stop it, stop it, I'm no pedo.
That ought to do it.
And... you were not a fish.
We got how thoroughly you understand many topics.
How many topics would ya like me to school ya on little fella?
NCAA football
NFL football
literature
boxing
track
body building
music
...?
The thread is on evolution.
Just say you don't get it and then I will be happy to read a list in another thread.
This thread is about whatever I decide to talk about, you really haven't figured that out by now, just how damn dense are you?
Stupid, we all get the theory of evolution, ok? I simply don't buy it, alright ya dumb ?
I call this kind of stuff, rusty nails.
Last edited by Avante; 03-02-2016 at 02:50 AM.
Dude, ya don't lose that kind of $$$$$ and then announce....ok my picks now and never lose again...ok ya dumb ? So I just figured it out, hahahaha!!!!!!!!!
Blake, you are one dumb .
More, rusty nails.
Last edited by Avante; 03-02-2016 at 03:08 AM.
Last edited by Avante; 03-02-2016 at 03:31 AM.
Have you ever posted a thread ya ing leech?You know you have a ty thread, when the OP abandons the topic...
Exquisitely detailed 520 million-year-old fossil shows individual nerves
Chengjiangocaris kunmingensis wasn't exactly a beautiful animal: The crustacean-like Cambrian creature had a long, segmented body and an unholy number of legs that it used to scuttle across the ocean floor. But scientists are oohing and ahhing over the ugly arthropod anyway, and for good reason. The nervous system of one 520 million-year-old specimen shows some of the best and most well-preserved nerves ever seen in an animal of that era.
According to a study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the fossil may be the oldest and most detailed example of a central nervous system yet identified, with even individual nerves -- rarely preserved soft tissue -- visible enough to study.
[125 million-year-old fossil shows remarkably preserved organs and hair]
Most fossil specimens are the remains of teeth (the hardest part of the body) or bones. Soft tissues, such as nerves, are much more likely to decay over time. So studying the long evolution of nervous systems can be a daunting prospect.
The fossil described in the new paper, which was found in southern China, is a rare exception.
Researchers from Yunnan University had to take special precautions to maintain the integrity of the delicate system.
"Using a fine needle and a steady hand, they chipped away parts of the rock to reveal the preserved internal features; they only needed a bit of nerve cord sticking out to have a good idea of where to continue excavating in the fossil," study co-author Javier Ortega-Hernández of the University of Cambridge told The Washington Post in an email. "As usually happens with amazing discoveries, when I first saw the material it took me a bit of time to make sense of what I was looking at. After a little while, however, excitement kicked in after realizing that not only was this an exquisitely preserved nerve cord, but also that it has impossibly thin individual nerves sticking out from it!" he wrote.
That nerve cord — analogous to the spinal cord found in modern in vertebrates — ran through its entire body. Bead-like clusters of nerve tissue called ganglia (which act like "mini-brains along the nerve cord," according to Ortega-Hernández) each controlled a single pair of the animal's many legs.
Scientists have seen animals of similar age with preserved ganglia before, which Ortega-Hernández believes is the result of the fatty content of that nerve tissue — some of those chemicals may make it more prone to fossilization than other soft stuff in the body is. But Chengjiangocaris kunmingensis also shows a few dozen delicate, tiny individual nerve fibers sprouting out from the nerve cord and ganglia.
That may be an important clue in the evolutionary mystery.
"By contrast, arthropods of today only have the ganglia, but a very restricted number of the lateral nerves," he said. "The only living group today where scientists have found dozens of individual nerve fibers structured like these are priapulids (penis worms) and onychophorans (velvet worms), which are cousins of arthropods.
"Putting all of this together, the new fossils of C. kunmingensis allow us to recognize that the evolution of the nervous system in living arthropods involved the loss of some of these nerves, and that their presence in the fossil and the velvet worms is a very ancestral feature," Ortega-Hernández explained.
Ironically, while the shrimp-like creature's nervous system has revealed itself to researchers, its legs remain mysterious. In an email to The Post, corresponding author Xi-guang Zhang of Yunnan University explained that despite the unprecedented nerve preservation, the specimen's legs were too far gone to make an accurate count.
"We know C. kunmingensis has twenty-six limb-bearing trunk segments," Zhang wrote. Of these, the scientists are fairly certain that the front five segments each had one pair of identical legs. It's possible that the rear three or four segments were totally limbless, and other segments could have had two or even four pairs of legs apiece.
"So an individual possesses several tens of paired limbs," Zhang said, "but because of incomplete preservation we still do not know exactly how many pairs it would have had."
The researchers will need to find even more of these intact nervous systems if they want to complete the evolutionary puzzle. But that could prove difficult: After all, the specimen described in the study was a rare bird (erm, rare ancient shrimp-y thing).
"We have to bear in mind that each nerve strand is about 10 times thinner than a human hair," Ortega-Hernández said, "so being able to recognize this level of neurological detail is simply amazing."
This article was originally published on Feb. 29. It has been updated.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...d-of-its-kind/
Staying in the mood....
Last edited by Avante; 03-02-2016 at 03:54 AM.
Rollin'
Last edited by Avante; 03-02-2016 at 04:06 AM.
Last edited by Avante; 03-02-2016 at 04:24 AM.
Last edited by Avante; 03-02-2016 at 04:40 AM.
Butt says whut?
Lol still claiming it was Mason that got on your computer and posted under your user name to make those failed NFL picks. You lying about it still makes me lol irl.
Lol betting expert
Dude, for about a year me and Mason shared this computer; ok simpleton. He has posted here many times as RaZon and Avante. It wasn't about him getting on ..my...computer under my anything....ok stupid? He was also a poster here...ok? You have talked to him many times.
I don't like to give out free $$$$$, as I mentioned. I wasn't going to make legit $$$$ plays. Mason however thought it might be fun and you were why he did it. Dude, you were a ing joke. Look how you acted/act, hahahaha!!!!!!! We both laughed our asses off at you. I still do.
Anyway...
In 2014 I decided to say... it... and make... MY... plays. I won $2100 in that Avante Betting Thread right here. In 2015 I won again, $500 (lost 550 on the SB). So you really think I just all of a sudden figured out ATS wagering, you really that stupid? There is a science to it ya dumb , one ya don't figure out in a year.
Dude, I don't lose at ATS wagering, and if ya had even half a brain you'd see how I do it. I know how it's done. Now next season I'll win again, as I've been doing for the last 25 years. BUT....you will still...see see see 2013.....hahahahaha~~~~~~
Blake, you're one dumb , ya know that?
Simpleton, pay attention.
teams will be one of 4 things...
HF...home fav
HD...home dog
RF...road fav
RD...road dog
Seattle is 13-4 as a HF ATS in Oct, St.Louis is a RD ATS 3-14 in Oct. Now ya find 3-5 "spots" where the numbers are that strong favoring a side. Now think ya dumb ....ok? What are the odds?
You start there, ok slugger?
Last edited by Avante; 03-02-2016 at 01:45 PM.
was that a nice little break from pedoville?
translation
Good stuff there Avante, so tell me some more about how to win ATS.
Sure.
You look for "spots" where one team has all the ATS advantages. Ya want to double up the number, something like 10-5.
Niners at home on MNF are 10-2 ATS as a HD. The Pats on the road on MNF are 4-7 ATS as a RF. That gives the Niners a 17-6 advantage ATS in this "spot". Now ya want to find 3-5 "spots" with numbers that strong on your side. So what are the odds of most of those "spots" going south on ya on the same week, yep...not good.
what does ATS stand for?
asians to screw?
Is this sad to watch or what, hahahaha!!!!!!!!!
Poor little guy.
I was just a little kid when I first started playing football, it didn't take me long before...."man these black kids can run'. Then in my track and HS football days there it was...
Sam Davis
Ocie Early
Tommie Smith
Augusta Brown
Milton Edwards
Clim Jackson
Tyrone Whatley
Leotis Booker
MacKinley Dillingham
Alvin Mann
Bill Cowings
Larance Jones
...all black speedsters from right round here.
Why do people try to..."it's not about race"....when it OBVIOUSLY is?
This is a black thang.
That could be....
Gale Sayers
Mel Gray
Nolan "Super Gnat" Smith
Brian Mitc
Travis Williams
Ollie Matson
Dante Hall
etc etc etc etc.............................
Last edited by Avante; 03-04-2016 at 03:46 PM.
Scientists Observe Evolution Of Rapidly Evolving Fish In Real Time
Evolution is a process that occurs at a rapid pace and although it can be difficult to keep up with, new genetic analysis techniques make it possible to detect the earliest stages of species formation in order to better grasp the processes that drive speciation.
In order to understand these processes, a team of researchers from Switzerland's University of Bern analyzed the rapid speciation that occurs in three-spined stickleback in and around the area of Lake Constance. The results revealed that species can diverge very rapidly, even when the two daughter species are breeding alongside each other at the same time, contradicting the common necessity for reproductive isolation during speciation.
Unlike many other species, three-spined stickleback possess no commercial value and thus have not been affected by lake eutrophication, bank stabilization and channelization, allowing them to spread throughout the Swiss Central Plateau for the last 150 years.
The new genetic study reveals the secret to this species success: rapid adaptation to new habitats. In fact, this adaptation is so rapid that evolutionary biologists are now using them as a model for the divergence of one species into two or more distinct species.
The team discovered two different forms of the stickleback - one common in the lake and the other in inflowing streams - despite the fact that lake stickleback migrate into the streams during spawning seasons.
"It was completely unexpected for the species to diverge over such a short period, given that the sticklebacks breed at the same time and at the same sites," said David Marques, first author of the study.
Typically, independent species come into existence through adaptation to different habitats and reproductive isolation. Now, different breeding and spawning seasons can be added to that list.
The rapid evolution of a new variant alongside its original variant allows scientists to witness evolution in real time and may help scientists better understand how other species have diverged into two or more variants.
Although previous research has evidenced evolution in real time, the organisms examined were bacteria with short reproductive times, allowing the researchers to witness the process over thousands of generations.
http://www.hngn.com/articles/185156/...-real-time.htm
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
