Lions and natural selection

Instintively a male lion will kill a litter of baby lions if it happens across them. This allows the mother of the cubs to come into heat faster and allows for the murdering male lion to mate with the female sooner. Also it helps insure that the strongest male lion is passing along his genes.Could someone describe by strickly the means of natural selection how a lion could acquire this trait?I understand how this trait could continue to exist once it has been aquired, but I am wondering how it could be aquired to start with?

quote:

---

Originally posted by LudvanB:
Hum...somehow,i sense that this is not just academic curiosity...trying to point out that lion now kill the cubs they encounter as a result of man sinning are we perhaps?

---

I suppose it is curiosity to the extent of how well thought out the theory of evolution based on strickly natural selection is. Regardless, I will admit I have my own beliefs, though I have not specifically subjected them in this forum at the moment. [b] [QUOTE] But to answer your question,all animals have in them the instinctive drive to procreate but that drive is always individual. Meaning,the lion from your exemple does not think in term of his species survival but in terms of HIS survival through his progeny and anything that gets in the way of this is a threat...even other cubs of his own species. If the male wants to procreate and encounters a female with cubs,his natural instinct is to get rid of the cubs of another lion so she'll bear HIS cubs,thus insuring the survival of HIS progeny.
[/b][/QUOTE]Yeah, this is basically what I was trying to say with my first post. I don't think anyone would disagree with it. It is what we observe and is science, or should I say biology. [b] [QUOTE] As for when this started,it probably did with the advent of life on earth.
[/b][/QUOTE]So at some point something had to think up this strategy?I would consider killing a young to ensure your gene pool is spred a strategy, would you not? [b] [QUOTE] It is unlikely that there ever was a time when a lion would not have acted this way.
[/b][/QUOTE]From the entrance of natural selection, I would also agree.

quote:

---

Originally posted by LudvanB:
I think you are approaching this from a wrong perspective. The lion of your exemple does not elaborate a strategy. He doesn't sit in some corner,thinking about where he's gonna find his next conquest and what he'll do if she happens to have kids. All of what he does is instinctive reactions.

---

Exactly. [b] [QUOTE] Some lions do kill the cubs of prospective mates to facilitate the continuation of their genes but yet other actually adopt the cubs they encounter,though its much more rare. I dont believe that anyone actually thought up this behaviour for lions or any other animals.
[/b][/QUOTE]If you believe no one thought up this behaviour, which I consider a very good strategy, then how did it "evolve?" [b] [QUOTE] I believe that it developed on its own when the first creature that was faced with this situation on earth acted this way. From an evolutionary perspective,its conceivable that even microbes did the same at some point before they evolved into more complex(read bigger) life forms[/b][/QUOTE]You see, this is still not an answer to the question. Ok lets consider the very first microbes that acted this way. Now, keep in mind you believe they didn't think up this strategy. How did the microbes develope this behavior? What I want to know is what situation do you believe it was faced with and how did that situation force it's reaction to be this behavior?

quote:

---

Originally posted by LudvanB:
they would have developed this behaviour as a reaction to the situation they faced. Animals will always takes the simplest route to a solution and killing the cubs of a prospective mate is much simpler than going off to atempt to find another mate.

---

How'd they know killing off the cubs of a prospective mate would make the mate go into heat faster? [b] [QUOTE] Its an instinctive mechanism which can be observed in all animals with very few exceptions. [/b][/QUOTE]I agree. I want to know how it got here by means of natural selection. [b] [QUOTE] If you say that you believe that this behaviour was the result of a programation done by God that was then corrupted by man's sin,then i say great...go on believing that. But that belief exists in a compelte void,meaning that its not substanciated by any evidence,either physical,mathematical or otherwise.
[/b][/QUOTE]I was just asking questions about what you would say science is.

quote:

---

Originally posted by LudvanB:
And i keep answering you...

---

I guess you don't understand the question if you think you've answered it already. [b] [QUOTE] we can only speculate that lions have an instinctive understanding of how female members of their species function,since they share so many common genes. [/b][/QUOTE]Wow, I wish I had that kind of instinct. It would be great to finally understand women. At some point in evolution's past this trait would have had to be none existant. If you can believe that life was formed from non living material obviously the instincts had to be non existant at some point. How could this trait of an animal killing the young to promote that animal's genes in the gene pool develope without the trait already existing to begin with? How would genes develope an animals instincts? [b] [QUOTE] Of course,there might be a whole other set of reasons for it which,i,not being a zoologist by trade,may not be aware of.
[/b][/QUOTE]So, you don't know? Why are you answering this question then? [b] [QUOTE] And yes,there might even be some theological implications here as well...i think we dont know enough to completely rule them out yet but we certainly know enough not to jump to the "goddidit" solution before all other venues have been explored.[/b][/QUOTE]Oh I think this example is evidence of a good design, a program to maintain quality control of an animal.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by redstang281:
[b] [QUOTE][b]Oh I think this example is evidence of a good design, a program to maintain quality control of an animal.[/QUOTE][/b]
[b] [QUOTE]You think that the cannibalism of the young and weak so a male lion can satisfy his lust is a Godly design? [/b][/QUOTE]Yes, it is a quality control. It helps to ensure the strongest of the species breeds its genes into the gene pool, thus helping the created creature kind to have a greater chance at existing longer.I think this makes an aweful lot more sense than any of these scenario's you fella's are trying so desperatly hard to imagine. [b] [QUOTE] Crave to eat cubs that don't smell like you and you procreate more, so other lions start practicing infant cannibalism.[/b][/QUOTE]So the lion needs to develope the instinct to know the difference between his cubs and other cubs, then he has to develope the instinct to only eat the cubs that don't smell like him. Hmmm... Can you explain that one? [b] [QUOTE] If a sense of taste is bred into an animal, the mystery vanishes quickly. [/b][/QUOTE]Actually, I don't even think they eat them all the time. A lot of times they don't eat the cubs, only kill them. [b] [QUOTE] But how genetics translates into behavior, even in people, is not clear and is the focus of much research. [/b][/QUOTE]Ok, so you don't know.

quote:

---

Originally posted by joz:
Example:
Generation 1 two lions 2 lioneses.
Lions a and b both breed with lioneses c and d.
lion a eats lion b`s cubs lion b adopts lion a`s cubs.
Generation 2 ten lions ten lioneses.
All 20 are offspring of lion a, if selective infanticide is genetic linked to y chromasome all males exhibit said trait....

---

The import part to focus on is "lion a eats lion b`s cubs."Why did lion a eat lion b's cubs and not his own cubs as well?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Barbarian:
[b]It's not hard to figure out, as suggested above. Male lions who happen to have the habit of killing cubs of other males upon taking over a pride, tend to leave more offspring.[/QUOTE]

​

So you are saying that male lions just "happen to have the habit" for no other reason than just happening to have it. Proof of a programmed design.

[b] [QUOTE]Natural Selection is about competitive advantage in reproducing. Killing the young of another helps to ensure the survival of the killer's genes. [/b][/QUOTE]Quality control. Programmed designed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quetzal:
since there's so much range competition, any lion who approaches the temporary pride will be attacked (females vs females, males vs males). The pride has a pretty good self-identification. A newly dominant male will not "recognize" the cubs as his, and hence will kill them.

---

So you believe the lion has an instinct to kill only cubs he does not recognize. What I want to know is how this instinct developed without the lion going through a stage where he killed every cub? [b] [QUOTE] It's more or less a side benefit that lionesses come in heat shortly afterwards. I think it's interesting that - if they didn't - lions might be extinct (the average estrus period is two years, or roughly the life expectancy of a dominant male, coupled with the fact that lion reproduction is pretty inefficient. What a life!) [/b][/QUOTE]Thank you for saying that. Yes, evidence of a good design.

[b] [QUOTE] As to why the lion does it - it doesn't have a reason. It does it because it seems the natural thing to do (to him). [/b][/QUOTE]Exactly, because he has been preprogrammed by a designer. [b] [QUOTE] Imagine the hypothetical first generation of lions. They don't actually care about cubs, one way or the other. But in one lion, something in his genetic makeup mutates..... But another lion has a slightly different mutation...he thinks it seems natural to kill all cubs he sees except those of lionesses with whom he has recently mated. [/b][/QUOTE]Let me first point out that the lion doesn't think as you say "he thinks it seems natural..."So just poof he gets the mutation to kill all non-related cubs for no reason?This is what you're saying. My computer has windows 2000 on it. It used to have windows 98, but then poof, one day the computer install windows 2000 on it's own. Oh, and no one ever programmed windows 2000. [b] [QUOTE] But don't think the lion does it to bring the female into heat, or to stop her wasting her time on other lions' cubs...he just does it because it seems natural to him. [/b][/QUOTE]Yup, his instinct is programmed into him, he doesn't have to think he just acts according to the instinct program he was giving

quote:

---

Originally posted by LudvanB:
Actually,no one "knows" anything about the past that we did not witness.

---

That's why evolution's not science. [b] [QUOTE] The only thing we have to go on is the evidence left by this past which we see today and the good old (and quite reliable) law of probability thinking(i.e. is it likely or unlikely?). And based on this,we can conclude with an acceptable degree of certainty that lions developed this instinct based on many environemental and inbreed factors and one nearly absolute truth common to most creatures...individual survival instinct. [/b][/QUOTE]I don't think you can explain this example I mentioned without divine intervention. [b] [QUOTE]Now,is this proof of intelligent design or evolution through chance? well,your guess is as good as mine or anyone else's...[/b][/QUOTE]I think it's pretty easy to see when you really think about it.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by redstang281:
[b] [QUOTE][b]Yes, it is a quality control. It helps to ensure the strongest of the species breeds its genes into the gene pool, thus helping the created creature kind to have a greater chance at existing longer.[/QUOTE][/b][b] [QUOTE] What can I say, other than that you have a pretty strange concept of God. [/b][/QUOTE]I think you don't understand the Christian concept of why death is in the world. [b] [QUOTE] Scent recognition is endemic in most predatory mammals, including cats. [/b][/QUOTE]I agree. But that alone does not answer the question. I have some questions:1) How did scent recognition become endemic? (it would have to evole)
2) How did lions develope to use this scent recognition to distinguise between their cubs and other cubs?
3) How did lions develope to only other cubs? (why didnt they kill all cubs and go extinct?) [QUOTE][b]then he has to develope the instinct to only eat the cubs that don't smell like him. Hmmm... Can you explain that one?Yes, consider it as a genetically transferred behavioral disorder to eat cubs. It conflicts with his natural instinct to not devour his own cubs. You end up with other cubs being eaten, but not his own. [/QUOTE][/b]How did he get the natural instinct not to kill his own cubs? [b] [QUOTE]The point is, the emergence of this behavior is not unexplainable. [/b][/QUOTE]Ok, still waiting.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by gene90:
[b] [QUOTE][b]Quality control
Is that what Hitler called it?.[/QUOTE][/b]There's a seperation between man and animals. [b] [QUOTE]I cannot accept that it was programmed because it contradicts my image of God.[/b][/QUOTE]You believe in evolution, right? Then your image of God is already not the correct one according to scripture. [b] [QUOTE] I also don't think that killing cubs benefits the species at large. For a lion to have fathered the cubs, he would have had to have driven off other competitors, that is, be stronger than other lions. Being too old to maintain dominance is not a genetic flaw, and destroying his offspring will not exert any sort of "quality control" over the species. The only microevolutionary advantage to killing cubs is in behavior of the one that does the killing, and the only "superior" genes that it specifically propagates are those genes that lead to the killing.[/b][/QUOTE]I think we would all agree as a whole that this process insures the survival of the species. Sure there are some sacrifices along the way, but in the end it all works. The Bible says all things work together for good. [b] [QUOTE]You've made a point that how genetics transcribes to behavior is supposedly a weakness in the evolutionist view of this behavior. [/b][/QUOTE]Yes, the whole theory of evolution above microevolution is something you have to believe in. [b] [QUOTE]Yet your view also requires that DNA transfers behavior because that is the only way this "program" can be transmitted from one generation to the next. [/b][/QUOTE]I believe this behavior existed in the first lion upon the enterance of natural selection as it is observed today. I believe it was a product of divine intervention.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by gene90:
[b] [QUOTE][b]What I want to know is how this instinct developed without the lion going through a stage where he killed every cub?[/QUOTE][/b][b] [QUOTE] Well that's too bad, because behaviorisms don't fossilize.
[/b][/QUOTE]I'm not asking for fossil proof, just a valid theory that holds up to scrutiny. [b] [QUOTE]But we can speculate that male lions have always avoided killing cubs that smell like them, and have always been at least indifferent to cubs that don't. At that point, it is possible to eat cubs selectively. [/b][/QUOTE]Yet you can not answer how male lions have aquired instinct to know not to kill cubs that smell like them or how male lions have aquired instinct to be at least indifferent to cubs that do smell like them.If you believe everything evolved from a rock, you'll have to believe the instincts evolved too.