Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Macroevolution Observed?
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 55 (94686)
03-25-2004 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Milagros
03-25-2004 1:52 AM


Macroevolution has been observed
From Merriam-Webster online:
Main Entry: macroevolution
Pronunciation: 'ma-krO-"e-v&-'l-sh&n also -"E-v&-
Function: noun
: evolution that results in relatively large and complex changes (as in species formation)
We have seen species formation, examples of which can be found here and here. Speciation is the only known barrier to evolution. Speciation causes a previously interbreeding group to split into two non-interbreeding groups. This causes different mutations to build up in the separate species, which can only lead to divergent morphology.
Macroevolution has been observed, since speciation has been observed. Microevolution, as it is used by scientists, refers to changes within a species, usually adaptive. Change that results in speciation is macroevolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Milagros, posted 03-25-2004 1:52 AM Milagros has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 55 (94976)
03-26-2004 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Milagros
03-26-2004 1:37 PM


Macroevolution is not an event, as Quetzal was trying to communicate. Macroevolution is a point reached by numerous microevolutionary steps. To use an analogy, microevolution is the straw on the camels back, and the straw that breaks the camels back is the macroevolutionary event, or speciation event. To use another analogy, there is an obvious difference between day and night. However, it is hard to determine the exact point where day transfers to night. There is an incremental change from light to dark, but the actual transfer of one into the other is ambiguous.
To put it frankly, there is only microevolution. Macroevolution is just the accumulation of microevolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Milagros, posted 03-26-2004 1:37 PM Milagros has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 55 (94998)
03-26-2004 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by Milagros
03-26-2004 3:32 PM


Milagros,
Let's use some real observations here. The following is from Observed Instances of Speciation
In 1964 five or six individuals of the polychaete worm, Nereis acuminata, were collected in Long Beach Harbor, California. These were allowed to grow into a population of thousands of individuals. Four pairs from this population were transferred to the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute. For over 20 years these worms were used as test organisms in environmental toxicology. From 1986 to 1991 the Long Beach area was searched for populations of the worm. Two populations, P1 and P2, were found. Weinberg, et al. (1992) performed tests on these two populations and the Woods Hole population (WH) for both postmating and premating isolation. To test for postmating isolation, they looked at whether broods from crosses were successfully reared. The results below give the percentage of successful rearings for each group of crosses.
WH WH - 75%
P1 P1 - 95%
P2 P2 - 80%
P1 P2 - 77%
WH P1 - 0%
WH P2 - 0%
They also found statistically significant premating isolation between the WH population and the field populations. Finally, the Woods Hole population showed slightly different karyotypes from the field populations.
These two populations of a once interbreeding population were separated for about 30 years. When brought back together, the two populations were not able to produce offspring. The last sentence from the above quote: "Finally, the Woods Hole population showed slightly different karyotypes from the field populations." The karyotype of a genome is the morphological characteristics of the chromosomes. The Woods Hole group shows different chromosome characteristics, and therefore a change in DNA structure. The reason why both populations did not have this change in chromosome morphology is because they were kept separate. Now, did keeping them separate CAUSE the change in the chromosomes? No, this is due to mutation. Did keeping the populations separate cause this change in chromosomes only to happen in one population? YES. Speciation is caused by changes in the DNA AND breeding isolation. If you only have one of these ingredients, speciation will not occur.
The changes in the DNA is macroevolution, since such a drastic change is the cause for speciation in isolated populations. However, it was small, incremental steps (microevolution) that led to the overall differences. Therefore, macroevolution is just the accumulation of microevolutionary events.
Does this clear things up? (not meant to be sarcastic, BTW. We really want you to understand where we are coming from).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by Milagros, posted 03-26-2004 3:32 PM Milagros 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