Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Scientists find missing link between whale and its closest relative, the hippo
UC Berkeley News ^ | 24 January 2005 | Robert Sanders, Media Relations

Posted on 02/08/2005 3:50:43 AM PST by PatrickHenry

A group of four-footed mammals that flourished worldwide for 40 million years and then died out in the ice ages is the missing link between the whale and its not-so-obvious nearest relative, the hippopotamus.

The conclusion by University of California, Berkeley, post-doctoral fellow Jean-Renaud Boisserie and his French colleagues finally puts to rest the long-standing notion that the hippo is actually related to the pig or to its close relative, the South American peccary. In doing so, the finding reconciles the fossil record with the 20-year-old claim that molecular evidence points to the whale as the closest relative of the hippo.

"The problem with hippos is, if you look at the general shape of the animal it could be related to horses, as the ancient Greeks thought, or pigs, as modern scientists thought, while molecular phylogeny shows a close relationship with whales," said Boisserie. "But cetaceans – whales, porpoises and dolphins – don't look anything like hippos. There is a 40-million-year gap between fossils of early cetaceans and early hippos."

In a paper appearing this week in the Online Early Edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Boisserie and colleagues Michel Brunet and Fabrice Lihoreau fill in this gap by proposing that whales and hippos had a common water-loving ancestor 50 to 60 million years ago that evolved and split into two groups: the early cetaceans, which eventually spurned land altogether and became totally aquatic; and a large and diverse group of four-legged beasts called anthracotheres. The pig-like anthracotheres, which blossomed over a 40-million-year period into at least 37 distinct genera on all continents except Oceania and South America, died out less than 2 and a half million years ago, leaving only one descendent: the hippopotamus.

This proposal places whales squarely within the large group of cloven-hoofed mammals (even-toed ungulates) known collectively as the Artiodactyla – the group that includes cows, pigs, sheep, antelopes, camels, giraffes and most of the large land animals. Rather than separating whales from the rest of the mammals, the new study supports a 1997 proposal to place the legless whales and dolphins together with the cloven-hoofed mammals in a group named Cetartiodactyla.

"Our study shows that these groups are not as unrelated as thought by morphologists," Boisserie said, referring to scientists who classify organisms based on their physical characteristics or morphology. "Cetaceans are artiodactyls, but very derived artiodactyls."

The origin of hippos has been debated vociferously for nearly 200 years, ever since the animals were rediscovered by pioneering French paleontologist Georges Cuvier and others. Their conclusion that hippos are closely related to pigs and peccaries was based primarily on their interpretation of the ridges on the molars of these species, Boisserie said.

"In this particular case, you can't really rely on the dentition, however," Boisserie said. "Teeth are the best preserved and most numerous fossils, and analysis of teeth is very important in paleontology, but they are subject to lots of environmental processes and can quickly adapt to the outside world. So, most characteristics are not dependable indications of relationships between major groups of mammals. Teeth are not as reliable as people thought."

As scientists found more fossils of early hippos and anthracotheres, a competing hypothesis roiled the waters: that hippos are descendents of the anthracotheres.

All this was thrown into disarray in 1985 when UC Berkeley's Vincent Sarich, a pioneer of the field of molecular evolution and now a professor emeritus of anthropology, analyzed blood proteins and saw a close relationship between hippos and whales. A subsequent analysis of mitochondrial, nuclear and ribosomal DNA only solidified this relationship.

Though most biologists now agree that whales and hippos are first cousins, they continue to clash over how whales and hippos are related, and where they belong within the even-toed ungulates, the artiodactyls. A major roadblock to linking whales with hippos was the lack of any fossils that appeared intermediate between the two. In fact, it was a bit embarrassing for paleontologists because the claimed link between the two would mean that one of the major radiations of mammals – the one that led to cetaceans, which represent the most successful re-adaptation to life in water – had an origin deeply nested within the artiodactyls, and that morphologists had failed to recognize it.

This new analysis finally brings the fossil evidence into accord with the molecular data, showing that whales and hippos indeed are one another's closest relatives.

"This work provides another important step for the reconciliation between molecular- and morphology-based phylogenies, and indicates new tracks for research on emergence of cetaceans," Boisserie said.

Boisserie became a hippo specialist while digging with Brunet for early human ancestors in the African republic of Chad. Most hominid fossils earlier than about 2 million years ago are found in association with hippo fossils, implying that they lived in the same biotopes and that hippos later became a source of food for our distant ancestors. Hippos first developed in Africa 16 million years ago and exploded in number around 8 million years ago, Boisserie said.

Now a post-doctoral fellow in the Human Evolution Research Center run by integrative biology professor Tim White at UC Berkeley, Boisserie decided to attempt a resolution of the conflict between the molecular data and the fossil record. New whale fossils discovered in Pakistan in 2001, some of which have limb characteristics similar to artiodactyls, drew a more certain link between whales and artiodactyls. Boisserie and his colleagues conducted a phylogenetic analysis of new and previous hippo, whale and anthracothere fossils and were able to argue persuasively that anthracotheres are the missing link between hippos and cetaceans.

While the common ancestor of cetaceans and anthracotheres probably wasn't fully aquatic, it likely lived around water, he said. And while many anthracotheres appear to have been adapted to life in water, all of the youngest fossils of anthracotheres, hippos and cetaceans are aquatic or semi-aquatic.

"Our study is the most complete to date, including lots of different taxa and a lot of new characteristics," Boisserie said. "Our results are very robust and a good alternative to our findings is still to be formulated."

Brunet is associated with the Laboratoire de Géobiologie, Biochronologie et Paléontologie Humaine at the Université de Poitiers and with the Collège de France in Paris. Lihoreau is a post-doctoral fellow in the Département de Paléontologie of the Université de N'Djaména in Chad.

The work was supported in part by the Mission Paléoanthropologique Franco-Tchadienne, which is co-directed by Brunet and Patrick Vignaud of the Université de Poitiers, and in part by funds to Boisserie from the Fondation Fyssen, the French Ministère des Affaires Etrangères and the National Science Foundation's Revealing Hominid Origins Initiative, which is co-directed by Tim White and Clark Howell of UC Berkeley.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: crevolist; darwin; evolution; whale
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,301-1,3201,321-1,3401,341-1,360 ... 2,241-2,242 next last
To: WildTurkey

good one, your education is showing again.


1,321 posted on 02/10/2005 6:48:09 AM PST by HankReardon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1317 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey

Very good, you answered my question by asking me the same question. You were on the debating team, weren't you? I can tell.


1,322 posted on 02/10/2005 6:49:35 AM PST by HankReardon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1314 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

Yes, seriously, I do find that very interesting. The question came to my mind as I was researching my family tree. I find it amazing the many different people required for my existance, and each of their life stories, I can discover are always very fascinating.


1,323 posted on 02/10/2005 6:52:14 AM PST by HankReardon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1315 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey

Uncle daddy, where's my banjo!?


1,324 posted on 02/10/2005 6:55:52 AM PST by HankReardon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1320 | View Replies]

To: HankReardon

well, though I cannot prove the following, it does seem plausible from my study of human history, so factor this in: most people, even today in an age in which mechanized transport is widely available, spend their entire lives within thirty miles of where they were born.


1,325 posted on 02/10/2005 7:00:42 AM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1323 | View Replies]

To: HankReardon; WildTurkey

almost certain WT was referring to the distal "inbreeding" which I have described.


1,326 posted on 02/10/2005 7:01:40 AM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1324 | View Replies]

To: shubi
Just because someone believes God created everything, doesn't mean he or she is a creationist.

Then why are you rejecting ID out of hand?

1,327 posted on 02/10/2005 7:04:45 AM PST by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1278 | View Replies]

To: shubi
The Meyer article is not science. You are using the fallacy of authority again.

I'm pointing out that it was peer-reviewed under SOP, and that would make it "science" as we define science.

1,328 posted on 02/10/2005 7:06:32 AM PST by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1283 | View Replies]

To: King Prout
even today in an age in which mechanized transport is widely available, spend their entire lives within thirty miles of where they were born.

Not me. I average over 4000 miles between where I was born and where I live. (I say average, because I am always traveling LOL!) I once had 3 simultaneous apartments (with three rental cars parked at airport long term parking) in three different cities, one on each coast, I was flying so much.

1,329 posted on 02/10/2005 7:10:12 AM PST by RadioAstronomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1325 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7
I'm pointing out that it was peer-reviewed under SOP, and that would make it "science" as we define science.

hmmmm ...

He doesn't identify by name the three scientists who reviewed the work.

1,330 posted on 02/10/2005 7:11:01 AM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1328 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
Did you ever address Chinese history and why their written documents on that time are somewhat lacking in describing how they were entirely wiped from the face of the earth?

No, I didn't. But at your insistence, here’s my address:

According to current theory, Chinese writing first appeared about 1300 to 1200 B.C. (link). You may also find the below quote from here of interest.

Chinese historiographers traditionally began their accounts of Chinese history with the foundation of the Xia Dynasty in the 21st century B.C., followed by the Shang Dynasty roughly half a millennium later, but the reliability of these accounts is at issue, since writing did not appear in China until about 1300 BC and the accounts were written many centuries after the event.

It appears that Chinese writings on early history do not reach back in time to cover any postulated period for the Flood. Even if they did, there's no reason to accept the accounts as accurate.

1,331 posted on 02/10/2005 7:12:01 AM PST by Tares (A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1205 | View Replies]

To: Ichneumon

WOW! Anyone read all that? Honestly, anyone?


1,332 posted on 02/10/2005 7:12:12 AM PST by HankReardon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer

yeah, I fall well outside that class, myself.
otoh: most folks don't.
certainly, before the advent of steam power, most folks didn't.


1,333 posted on 02/10/2005 7:13:15 AM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1329 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7
Then why are you rejecting ID out of hand?

"ID" is a movement designed to destroy the credibility of evolutionary theory. So far, the best argument "ID" has is that "we don't know therefore God did it".

1,334 posted on 02/10/2005 7:13:20 AM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1327 | View Replies]

To: HankReardon

yes, and it took several hours to do so.


1,335 posted on 02/10/2005 7:13:46 AM PST by King Prout (Remember John Adam!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1332 | View Replies]

To: King Prout

I don't think he was, I think he was referring to my inbredness, you know, a weak attempt at a slam.


1,336 posted on 02/10/2005 7:15:12 AM PST by HankReardon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1326 | View Replies]

To: stremba
It's a point that can be debated forever, however, the scientific method was created by professing Christians in Europe as were universities.

Also, the advances in the knowledge of nature in the 400-plus years via the scientific method have been exponentially greater than those that occurred in the 3500 years that Hindu-Arabic numerals were used before science.

And the fellows who cooked up Hindu numerals figured the Earth was supported by 16 elephants :-)

1,337 posted on 02/10/2005 7:15:39 AM PST by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1302 | View Replies]

To: Tares

Thank you for the interesting link. It says that Chinese writing was FULLY developed by 1200 BC and thus had been in use for centuries prior to that.


1,338 posted on 02/10/2005 7:15:56 AM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1331 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7
And the fellows who cooked up Hindu numerals figured the Earth was supported by 16 elephants :-)

What were the pillars made of that the fellows that cooked up the Bible thought the earth was supported by ...

1,339 posted on 02/10/2005 7:22:59 AM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1337 | View Replies]

To: HankReardon
I don't think he was, I think he was referring to my inbredness, you know, a weak attempt at a slam.

You do not believe that the Bible supports incest?

1,340 posted on 02/10/2005 7:23:57 AM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1336 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,301-1,3201,321-1,3401,341-1,360 ... 2,241-2,242 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson