Posted on 05/03/2002 10:20:22 AM PDT by Gladwin
Scientists say they have found the fossilised remains of the earliest known flower. It was discovered in a slab of stone in north-east China and the plant is thought to have lived at least 125 million years ago.
Researchers at the University of Florida say the species could be the predecessor of all flowering plants. They say it probably grew in shallow lakes shared by dinosaurs and other prehistoric creatures.
The plant, called archaefructus sinensis or "ancient fruit from China," is of a species never before seen, said David Dilcher of the Florida Museum of Natural History and the University of Florida.
"It is like the mother of all flowering plants," he said.
Professor Dilcher is the co-author of a study published on Friday in the journal Science. He worked with Ge Sun, a geologist at Jilin University in Changchun, China, and other researchers.
Botanists had long considered a woody plant from New Caledonia as the most ancient of flowering plants. But Professor Dilcher said the new discovery was even older. "It changes our whole impression of what is the oldest of all flowering plants," he said.
The flower's closest "modern relative" is probably the water lily, said Professor Dilcher, because it apparently lived in clear, shallow waters, with its flowers and seeds extending above the surface.
The discovery suggests that flowering plants started out as herbs that were able to reproduce quickly, he said. It "was not a flashy flower," he said. The plant's flowering part had no real petals, but acted only as a reproductive unit - essential for its survival.
"The reason we can say it is a flowering plant is that the seed is enclosed inside of carpels [female part] of the fruit," said Professor Dilcher.
Other experts in Science said more research was needed before the new flower was generally accepted as the most ancient of flowering plants.
But Peter Raven of the Missouri Botanical Garden in St Louis said it "may be the most significant flowering plant ever found."
Plus, these pictures are not non sequiturs intended to wow the dummies.
China does seem to have a good bit of the action just now in paleontology. One answer might be that it's big and relatively unexplored (fossil-wise) until lately. It seems to have had a number of Pompeii-style or even Mt. St. Helens-style volcanic burial events.
Plus, these pictures are not non sequiturs intended to wow the dummies.
Agreed. Nature isn't debating ID. The arguments on FR wander a bit by comparison to your standard, stolid, science article. I've noticed a lot of illogic, too.
Could it be that we are evolving into differnet species? A split into technological man and non-technological man? Let me set the wayback machine to the future and I'll check this out.
The camel hump is no more a "macro"-evolutionary event than is the squashed face of the bulldog. Or is every characteristic of an animal evidence of "macro"-evolution?
The morlocks have always been among us. Diversity is strength.
Which thread was deleted? The $250,000 thread still seems to be there.
Also, last night I posted a new Jack Chick vs. Harry Potter thread here
First it was a sixth digit. Now it's the facial structure of a dog. Still not there, but you're getting closer.
Or is every characteristic of an animal evidence of "macro"-evolution?
No. Characteristics at the species level or above are generally considered macroevolutionary.
What defines the species?
I know you want to take the long way home in the hopes of getting lost in a gray area somewhere, but I won't play silly games.
There's no need to go back to species definitions because camels, dogs and humans are already adequately classified.
I did not ask for a specific species definition, I asked for what defined the species. That is essentially what is being "discussed".
It is in part the characteristics of the animal that put it into a species. These are changed routinely(in the sense of a characteristic of a species). Feathers used to be defining for birds, now some want to remove it from that level. Cusps on teeth were used to define mesonychus. etc.
A polite question. Have you caught something from Vade? Please search this page. Find the pronoun "you".
Cloaked & lurking ...
Cloaked and lurking!
Not too flashy but it sure beats working!
Freeping on a Monday!
I might learn a little one day.
I doubt that it was JR. Just an overworked and harrassed moderator, probably, yielding to the whining of one or two creo types. No loss. We can always create another thread.
I hereby resolve that I shall never make a direct post to another creo boy. All my posts will be to evos, or to "All" or to myself (placemarkers). I've learned that dialoge with a creo (with a very few exceptions) is an absolute waste of time, and tends to degenerate into personal insults.
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.