Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Foul Tasting Bugs
InGodITrust
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 53
From: Reno, Nevada, USA
Joined: 05-02-2009


Message 1 of 47 (550360)
03-15-2010 3:44 AM


There are a number of species of insects that use a foul taste for defense. I watched part of a TV program recently that showed one such species with a baby alligator as a predator. The narrator said that after the alligator eats a couple of the bugs, it will learn its lesson and eat no more. Altough the scene may have been staged for TV, they showed the 'gator killing one of the bugs.
Obviously the defense is good for the species as a whole, but how did natural selection come into play in the development of the foul taste, if a couple bugs are killed before the predator learns its lesson? The foulest tasting bug has no better chance of survivng to pass on its genes than any of the other bugs.
I'm sure biologists have contemplated this and written about it. Maybe it's even been discussed here at EVC before. But I haven't come across the answer yet. Who has plausible speculation?
Edited by InGodITrust, : spelling

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Dr Jack, posted 03-15-2010 10:54 AM InGodITrust has not replied
 Message 4 by Wounded King, posted 03-15-2010 10:58 AM InGodITrust has not replied
 Message 7 by Phage0070, posted 03-15-2010 11:10 AM InGodITrust has not replied

  
InGodITrust
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 53
From: Reno, Nevada, USA
Joined: 05-02-2009


Message 14 of 47 (550534)
03-16-2010 4:12 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by Dr Jack
03-15-2010 12:02 PM


Re: Sounds rather obvious to me
Thanks everyone. I'm still thinking this through. Like with many other aspect of evolution, this gets so complicated it is mind-boggling (for me anyway).
IGIT

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Dr Jack, posted 03-15-2010 12:02 PM Dr Jack has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by RAZD, posted 03-16-2010 8:11 PM InGodITrust has replied
 Message 17 by Taz, posted 03-16-2010 9:10 PM InGodITrust has not replied

  
InGodITrust
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 53
From: Reno, Nevada, USA
Joined: 05-02-2009


Message 18 of 47 (550661)
03-17-2010 5:09 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by RAZD
03-16-2010 8:11 PM


Re: evolution is in populations not in individuals
Mr. Jack, Wounded King and others have responded--without reservation--that kin selection is responsible for the foul taste. So I gather that this is a widely accepted explanation. And kin selection is a form of natural selection.
I understand how kin selection works once the foul taste is established throughout a population, but it is harder to see how the foul-taste blood line gets started and spreads through a population by natural selection.
To simplify the matter, I first thought of a population of bugs that tasted okay. Then one individual bug in that population turns up with a genetic mutation that gave it all-out horrible taste, that a predator would reject. This is unrealistic, because the development of the foul taste would probably come in increments, rather that all at once.
At any rate, how does natural selection spread this gene from the first individual possesing it to the rest of the population? Might the gene come with a cost, and hamper the first individual in some way? Would it be able to attract a mate as easily?
But RAZD, you have the answer with the "neutral mutation." Neutral mutations can be used to fill in a lot of blanks, I would guess-- kind of a get-out-of-jail-free card. It doesn't seem to me that the spread of neutral mutations, in this case, can be considered natural selection. It is chance.
If the foul taste came about de novo incrementally, or if it existed for another purpose but was later refined for defense, it still seems that if neutral mutations were involved, the taste would be a result of chance more than natural selection.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by RAZD, posted 03-16-2010 8:11 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Wounded King, posted 03-17-2010 5:23 AM InGodITrust has not replied
 Message 21 by Dr Jack, posted 03-17-2010 5:50 AM InGodITrust has replied
 Message 23 by RAZD, posted 03-17-2010 12:52 PM InGodITrust has replied

  
InGodITrust
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 53
From: Reno, Nevada, USA
Joined: 05-02-2009


Message 27 of 47 (550716)
03-17-2010 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by RAZD
03-17-2010 12:52 PM


Re: evolution is in populations not in individuals
RAZD, in my last post I wrote: "It doesn't seem to me that the spread of neutral mutations, in this case, can be considered natural selection. It is chance."
This was a hasty and poorly thought out response to your post, and I feel stupid now that I've thought about it more. For some reason I was thinking that neutral mutations didn't "count" in natural selection. But they have been "judged" by nature and found neutral, and can spread and come into play later.
IGIT

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by RAZD, posted 03-17-2010 12:52 PM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
InGodITrust
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 53
From: Reno, Nevada, USA
Joined: 05-02-2009


(1)
Message 29 of 47 (550718)
03-17-2010 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Dr Jack
03-17-2010 5:50 AM


Re: evolution is in populations not in individuals
Mr. Jack: After more thought, I now see how exaptation together with kin selection is a plausible explanation.
Well, you can probably see that I am hoping to find chinks in the armour of the ToE, and I haven't found one here. I don't really expect that I will ever find a chink myself, but I'm sure they exist, and will be discovered by scientists some day.
Thanks again to everyone.
IGIT

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Dr Jack, posted 03-17-2010 5:50 AM Dr Jack has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Percy, posted 03-18-2010 9:01 AM InGodITrust has not replied
 Message 33 by Theodoric, posted 03-18-2010 11:04 AM InGodITrust has not replied
 Message 47 by dwise1, posted 03-19-2010 5:03 PM InGodITrust has not replied

  
InGodITrust
Member (Idle past 1670 days)
Posts: 53
From: Reno, Nevada, USA
Joined: 05-02-2009


Message 44 of 47 (550886)
03-19-2010 3:57 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by New Cat's Eye
03-18-2010 4:40 PM


It's my fault we got off the topic. I really just wanted to say I was satisfied with the bug info and thank everyone. But I went too far because I wanted to be open with my motive, so every one was clear that I'm the "enemy." I have a couple other questions I'd like to raise in future threads, and hope people might be as generous with those as they were here.
IGIT

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-18-2010 4:40 PM New Cat's Eye has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Wounded King, posted 03-19-2010 5:16 AM InGodITrust 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