Posted on 07/13/2006 1:21:13 PM PDT by presidio9
Finches on the Galapagos Islands that inspired Charles Darwin to develop the concept of evolution are now helping confirm it — by evolving.
A medium sized species of Darwin's finch has evolved a smaller beak to take advantage of different seeds just two decades after the arrival of a larger rival for its original food source.
The altered beak size shows that species competing for food can undergo evolutionary change, said Peter Grant of Princeton University, lead author of the report appearing in Friday's issue of the journal Science.
Grant has been studying Darwin's finches for decades and previously recorded changes responding to a drought that altered what foods were available.
It's rare for scientists to be able to document changes in the appearance of an animal in response to competition. More often it is seen when something moves into a new habitat or the climate changes and it has to find new food or resources, explained Robert C. Fleischer, a geneticist at the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History and National Zoo.
This was certainly a documented case of microevolution, added Fleischer, who was not part of Grant's research.
Grant studied the finches on the Galapagos island Daphne, where the medium ground finch, Geospiza fortis, faced no competition for food, eating both small and large seeds.
In 1982 a breeding population of large ground finches, Geospiza magnirostris, arrived on the island and began competing for the large seeds of the Tribulus plants. G. magnirostris was able to break open and eat these seeds three times faster than G. fortis, depleting the supply of these seeds.
In 2003 and 2004 little rain fell, further reducing the food supply. The result was high mortality among G. fortis with larger beaks, leaving a breeding population of small-beaked G. fortis that could eat the seeds from smaller plants and didn't have to compete with the larger G. magnirostris for large seeds.
That's a form of evolution known as character displacement, where natural selection produces an evolutionary change in the next generation, Grant explained in a recorded statement made available by Science.
"Adaption being used to prove evolution."
Uh... Isn't that the whole point of evolution; adaptation over eons making species entirely different from where they started?
Anyone who expects the bird to turn into a fish in a few years has missed the whole concept.
That's a form of evolution known as character displacement, where natural selection produces an evolutionary change in the next generation, Grant explained in a recorded statement made available by Science.
So, there are two pre-existing varieties of finch. A third comes on the scene, making it difficult for one of the first two to compete. It begins to die off while the other grows in population.
Presumably, if the trend continued over time, one would die off, leaving the gene pool less varied than it started with. The amount of genetic information seems to shrink, not grow.
Now, I can see how some folks would say this is evidence of evolution, using a strict definition of the word as change. But I'm hard pressed to see how this example leads to a growth in species (genetic information).
So, there are two pre-existing varieties of finch. A third comes on the scene, making it difficult for one of the first two to compete. It begins to die off while the other grows in population.<<
Do the three interbreed?
My guess is yes. That would be an inconvenient truth.
To bad "scientists" aren't asking the question.
DK
Evolution is pre-conceived. Rule #1: There is no God.
What would make it inconvenient?
Do the three interbreed?
My guess is yes. That would be an inconvenient truth.
I see nothing in the article that suggests speciation. There would be nothing "inconvenient" about interbreeding.<<
So you don't even care if they are different "species".
As I have said before you don't know what a species is.
Did you read the article? There's evolution going on here.
One species turning into "itself".
LOL
DK
Witches believe in God. When I say "there is no God" what that really means is "there is no God as described in the Bible"
"When I say "there is no God" what that really means is "there is no God as described in the Bible""
And you would still be wrong. Most people who accept evolution in the USA also are Christian. There is nothing in evolutionary theory that says God does or doesn't exist. Evolution is like every other theory in science, it can't speak about the untestable/supernatural.
How would you expect evolution to proceed?
You are so very wrong. I am a firm beleiver in evolution and a very firm believer in God. Who else could design such an intricate system?
If you have no problem believing that God designed an intricate system of climate and weather, why is it such a stretch to believe that he could also design an intricate system of evolution?
Your pre-conceived Rule #2: "Evolutionists MUST be atheists" is also very wrong.
OH PLEASE, get real!! He's the ONE that you deny daily.
The bible says God created the animals in the 6 days of creation, context makes it clear that they are the same 24 hr days that we have now, and it also says that animals breed after their own kind. This is in direct contradiction to what evolution says.
The bible says God made man in His own image and that He was made from the dust and was made an adult and then God took his rib out and made Eve. This is in direct contradiction to what evolution says.
You seem to be missing a few details about either what evolution says or what the bible says.
When they evolve into veal chops, send me 10 lbs.
How would you expect evolution to proceed?<<
Maybe if these were actually different species competing for a different niche your question would make sense. We don't know if they are. Biologists aren't asking the question, and you don't care about the answer.
That's why ToEs have crappy results.
DK
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.