Login

Join for Free!
17814 members


THEORY OF EVOLUTION

Discussion of everything related to the Theory of Evolution.

Moderator: BioTeam

THEORY OF EVOLUTION

Postby param on Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:40 am

How does the "THEORY OF EVOLUTION" is supported through classification of animals and plants..........
Your help too answer this question will be very appreciated..............
param
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:29 am

Postby MrMistery on Thu Mar 31, 2005 8:51 pm

Plants and animals higher up the chain have superior characteristics than those lower on the evolution chain. For example, a frog's heart has 3 chambers, while a bird's heart has 4. A bird has steady methabolism, while a reptile does not
"I have no intention of stopping anytime soon. I want to understand the universe and answer the big questions, that is what keeps me going" - Stephen Hawking
User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
 
Posts: 6111
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)

Postby biostudent84 on Thu Mar 31, 2005 9:58 pm

I wouldn't say it makes them "superior." A bird's heart has four chambers because it needs four chambers. An amphibian can survive with three, so it only creates three.
User avatar
biostudent84
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 977
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:00 am
Location: Farmville, VA

Postby James on Thu Mar 31, 2005 10:33 pm

We classify organisms into categories that have similar characteristics, eg mammals, reptiles etc. These cateogories have formed from divergence from common ancestors. Thus, those organisms classified more closely together have diverged less from each other through natural selection, and are closer related.
User avatar
James
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 547
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:00 pm
Location: England

.

Postby Linaeus on Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:00 pm

I dont get the question? :?
User avatar
Linaeus
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2005 1:55 pm

Postby reallyuniquename on Thu Apr 07, 2005 2:04 pm

Actually, the interesting thing about the evolutionary tree is the huge variation it has potential to be. "Trees" can be grown from many different sources. Some will use a phenotype (physical characteristic), or section of DNA to make their "trees" grow branches. The difficult thing is using fossil records as the trunk of ancestors because than it becomes a theory.
The strange thing about the "trees", and the part where they lose credibility is when you select for different characteristics to compare with to grow the "tree." For instance, a certain molecule that is common in the trunk's genotype can be used to show how despite diverging, the molecule from descendents remains the same, linking the "tree" together. Given, this seems to make sense at face value, but select for a different molecule, and you get a whole new tree. Even with physical characteristics, the same is true. The variation amoung what the tree should look like is near endless. It creates alot of chaos when researched. I encourage you all to look into it.

Ben
reallyuniquename
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 7:33 pm



Return to Evolution

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests