Thanks JimSEA.
|
Posted on 11/29/2015 11:11:30 AM PST by JimSEA
Periods of high extinction on Earth, rather than evolutionary adaptations, may have been a key driver in the diversification of amniotes (today's dominant land vertebrates, including reptiles, birds, and mammals), according to new research published in Scientific Reports.
The new study reveals that mass extinctions among some groups of amniotes coincide with numerous and large diversifications in other closely related groups.
Conducted by scientists from the Museum für Naturkunde in Berlin, Germany, and the University of Lincoln, UK, the research challenges commonly held views that support a relationship between the evolution of "key innovations" in a group and the rapid increase in its number of species. The researchers behind the new study suggest the evidence for such a relationship has only ever been circumstantial.
The new study examined the issue of adaptive radiations among early amniotes, from 315 to 200 million years ago. This time period witnessed some of the most profound climate changes on a global scale, including the dramatic shrinking of the southern polar icecap, the disappearance of equatorial rainforests, a substantial increase in temperature, and prolonged drought conditions. The time period under study also included the largest mass extinction in Earth's history, about 252 million years ago.
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
Maybe ‘diversity’ is the key to ‘extinction’...................
I could have told them that and saved them a lot of money. Evolution produces new species. Old species die out when they are no longer viable in an environment.
Darwin’s book was named “On the Origin of Species”.
Species become extinct and new ones appear all the time.
I tell people all the time, “stop trying to save the trees. The trees will simply talk to one another and develop chainsaw resistant bark when the time is right.” Such is the lunacy of evolution.
As some ancient astronaut theorist believe.
That's it. All this diversity is killing us!!!
Amniotes?
Never mind; I reread the first sentence. I thought “amniote” was an auto-corrected rendition of “ammonite”, but I had missed the definition given. Sorry.
lunacy and unprovability of a nakedly false theory.
You mean it’s OK to not give a flying Obama about the snail darter?
Works for the atheist though.
I agree.
Theory of the month. Stay tuned for the next theory.
Amniote. “membrane surrounding the fetus” defined by the makeup of the egg. Tetrapods or descendants descendants of four-limbed and backboned animals and who lay eggs on land.
I’m surprised this is presented as such a big surprise. I thought it was conventional wisdom that the extinction event that killed off the dinosaurs was what made it possible for mammals to develop. That this should also happen among more closely related groups doesn’t seem like that much of a stretch.
Thanks JimSEA.
You wrote:
“...I tell people all the time, “stop trying to save the trees. The trees will simply talk to one another and develop chainsaw resistant bark when the time is right.†Such is the lunacy of evolution...”
You presume that chainsaw resistant bark is the proper response, and then claim it’s absurd. Here is a non absurd response: Let’s say the chainsaw weilding “hunters” are looking for straight, tall trees, for the valuable lumber they will produce. What trees will they leave behind? Short, bent trees. Which trees have the best chance of living long enough to produce the seeds for the next generation? Short bent trees. So, what are the environment pressures selecting for? Shorter, twistier trees, not bullet proof bark.
After I saw that “amniote” was the correct word, I knew the general meaning. Then I looked it up anyway. Thanks, though. Next time I’ll read more carefully, maybe.
So, mass extinction is a good thing then!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
