Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,480 Year: 3,737/9,624 Month: 608/974 Week: 221/276 Day: 61/34 Hour: 4/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Proving Evolution in the Age of Genetics
Clark
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 50 (176720)
01-13-2005 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by crashfrog
01-13-2005 7:47 PM


Dogs = Ring Species?
How accurate is it to describe the different varieties of dogs as a ring species? Is it at least a similar concept?
A personal anecdote, I had Miniature Schnauzer (small dog) that got impregnated by a Newfoundland (very big dog). My dog had to have an abortion or the pup would have killed it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by crashfrog, posted 01-13-2005 7:47 PM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by NosyNed, posted 01-13-2005 8:16 PM Clark has replied
 Message 30 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2005 10:30 PM Clark has replied

  
Clark
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 50 (176739)
01-13-2005 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by NosyNed
01-13-2005 8:16 PM


Re: Dogs = Ring Species?
If the situation you describe is the general case (and I would think it is) then those two varieties are separate species are they not?
The Hovind-ites aren't going to agree. "a dog is still a dog"
I guess the exception would be the small male impregnating the large female. I can't really picture the mechanics of it happening (!), but the offspring and parents would most likely surive. I imagine it wouldn't happen in the natural though, so the exception fails.
This isn't about Genetics, so I suppose it's off topic. But I don't think Creo's realize it stuff like this that can result in speciation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by NosyNed, posted 01-13-2005 8:16 PM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by NosyNed, posted 01-13-2005 8:39 PM Clark has not replied
 Message 21 by crashfrog, posted 01-13-2005 9:37 PM Clark has replied

  
Clark
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 50 (176760)
01-13-2005 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by crashfrog
01-13-2005 9:37 PM


I don't think they'd recognize each other as mates. (That's "behavioral reproductive isolation.)
except I know dogs that recognize my leg as a mate. haha.
Behavioral reproductive isolation. Cool. Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by crashfrog, posted 01-13-2005 9:37 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Clark
Inactive Member


Message 32 of 50 (176791)
01-13-2005 10:42 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by commike37
01-13-2005 10:17 PM


Chromosomes
humans have 46
and Chimps have 48.
It seems possible to me, that the human/chimp common ancestor had 48 chromosones (24 sex chromosomes) and the human lineage had a mutation event where 2 chromosones fused into 1.
Here's some good stuff on humans and chimps and genetics.
Page not found | Nature

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by commike37, posted 01-13-2005 10:17 PM commike37 has not replied

  
Clark
Inactive Member


Message 33 of 50 (176795)
01-13-2005 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by RAZD
01-13-2005 10:30 PM


Re: Dogs = Ring Species?
Thanks for your reply.
What do you mean by "not a closed loop?"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2005 10:30 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2005 10:59 PM Clark has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024