Evolution Occurs In The Blink Of An Eye

[ClintonTyree]

Story originally from Livescience.com

A population of butterflies has evolved in a flash on a South Pacific island to fend off a deadly parasite.

The proportion of male Blue Moon butterflies dropped to a precarious 1 percent as the parasite targeted males. Then, within the span of a mere 10 generations, the males evolved an immunity that allowed their population share to soar to nearly 40 percent—all in less than a year.

more.....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20070712/sc_livescience/evolutionoccursintheblinkofaneye

I think they meant to say "creation occurs in the blink of an eye". Evolution is, after all, nothing more than a theory. ;) I'm sure it was the hand of god that stopped the extinction of these butterflies and NOT evolution. As for Dodo Birds, Tasmanian Devils and Dinosaurs etc....... I guess god didn't find those creations worthy of saving. He DOES work in mysterious ways!

[rucky]

1. It's because the butterflies prayed to God.

but keep thinking your crackpot opinion.

[ClintonTyree]

3. How could I have been so blind?

There are none so blind that will not see. ;) I stand corrected.

[Selatius]

2. Even a good number of creationists concede that micro-evolution is possible.

They don't concede, however, on the issue of macro-evolution. The reason they conceded on micro-evolution was because even the most ordinary of people have witnessed cockroaches developing immunities to commonly used pesticides.

[ClintonTyree]

7. They just can't take that leap of faith.....

to extrapolate from micro to macro, huh? Yet they're willing to believe in something for which there is absolutely no proof whatsoever of being true. Makes sense to me. :silly:

[The Cleaner]

25. Many creationists will tell you there's a difference between "evidence" and "proof."

Evidence being a series of presuppositions, proof being absolute indisputable in your face confirmation of the evidence.

[Solon]

11. The problem with the creationists is that they think there is a difference between the two...

As far as I can tell, they made those terms up, period.

[mondo joe]

18. That's like saying taking a step is possible but walking a mile isn't. NT

[The Cleaner]

23. Micro evolution meaning "change within species" I take it?

that's what I have heard. That change ocurrs within a species as opposed to cross-speciation.

[Zucca]

4. Tommorow Chimp will finally Evolve?

OMG what will they do then...He starts walking upright fulltime and gets his opposable thumb out of his ass...DU will surely go BLANK!


:>)

[JacquesMolay]

5. That's what they call punctuated ...

...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium"> evolution. Modification with descent (Darwin's phrase - I just read Origin of Species) takes place very slowly for a long time, then there's a burst of change quickly.

[Phredicles]

8. I read about this in Stephen Jay Gould's work;

this model has also been applied to the way languages evolve over time (so that Spanish, French, and Italian are spoken where there used to be Latin). It's a great example of an idea developed in one field proving valuable in another.

[ClintonTyree]

9. It occured rather quickly in this case....

there wasn't a slow, gradual evolution here followed by an explosive change. The parasites presented themselves only recently and within a years time these butterflies evolved into a species that could withstand their attacks. There wasn't time for a slow, measured evolution and then an explosion: the explosion had to happen immediately, and it did. My hat is off to those butterflies! ;) Nature never ceases to amaze me.

[JacquesMolay]

10. Actually, the evolution probably has been taking place a long time...

... if they're still around now, Darwin would state that their genes have obtaine a lot of leeway over time for the type of genetic variation that took place here. He also said that the struggle for survival with other organisms was the most important determining factor for natural selection (as opposed to, say, change in climate). My guess, also, is that a lot of these butterflies without this favorable mutation died off.

[MonkeyFunk]

20. right

the genetic changes that allowed SOME butterflies to be resistant to this parasite probably occurred over a long period of time. It was only when this extreme pressure was put on the population, that all those without those genes died, and the one WITH the genes took over.

This is interesting because it shows HOW these changes can be quickly spread into a large population.

[leftofthedial]

6. "As for Dodo Birds, Tasmanian Devils and Dinosaurs etc......."

don't forget honorable republicans in this list

[BadgerKid]

12. Wait for karma ... there'll be no endangered

species list for republicans.

[BeyondThePale]

13. YEAH GOD!

hopefully god will smite the unbelieving parasites!

[thereismore]

14. This was most likely not a case of evolution at all:

The original population probably contained a small fraction (say, less than 1%) of naturally occuring mutation conferring resistance to the parasite. While the non-resistant males died off, the small number of resistant ones survived. Now, because there was no competition from the "normal" (i.e., non-resistant) males, the resistant ones proliferated. Therefore, no evolution, just a population shift. The same thing by the way happened with the white and dark moths that are cited as an example of evolution. Because both white and dark moths existed before industrial pollution, proliferation of the dark ones was just a population shift, which is back to normal today (both dark and white moths exist in some ratio). Same thing with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. They existed even before antibiotics were used (were found in bodies buried prior to Fleming's discovery). So all they did was they proliferated when antibiotics were used. Otherwise they are not as fit as the non-resistant bacteria, because if left alone in an environment free of antibiotics, the original non-resistant form gets the upper hand and proliferates again.


You must see that the butterflies are just that-butterflies, so there is no evolution of one species to another. Hate to pour water on your fire, but think about these things.

[NickB79]

15. Have you read the definition of evolution in a textbook?

""In fact, evolution can be precisely defined as any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next."

Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, Biology, 5th ed. 1989 Worth Publishers, p.974 "

There was most definitely a change in allele frequency here as the resistant portion of the population now has a far greater number of individuals than before the parasite took hold. That is the very definition of evolution.

[The Cleaner]

28. So let me get this straight.

If I have a litter of 100 pups and 80 fall ill to a disease, and the remaining 20 are resistant and go on to produce hundreds more healthy pups through several generations, how is that evolution??

Or maybe it is you who has their definition of evolution wrong?
:shrug:

[mondo joe]

29. What do YOU think the definition of evolution is? And on what do you base that

definition?

[The Cleaner]

30. Wiki has a good definition of evolution...

In biology, evolution is the change in the inherited traits of a population from generation to generation. These traits are the expression of genes that are copied and passed on to offspring during reproduction. Mutations in these genes can produce new or altered traits, resulting in heritable differences (genetic variation) between organisms. New traits can also come from transfer of genes between populations, as in migration, or between species, in horizontal gene transfer. Evolution occurs when these heritable differences become more common or rare in a population, either nonrandomly through natural selection or randomly through genetic drift.

Natural selection is a process that causes heritable traits that are helpful for survival and reproduction to become more common, and harmful traits to become rarer. This occurs because organisms with advantageous traits pass on more copies of the traits to the next generation.<1><2> Over many generations, adaptations occur through a combination of successive, small, random changes in traits, and the natural selection of the variants best-suited for their environment.<3> In contrast with this, genetic drift produces random changes in the frequency of traits in a population. Genetic drift arises from the element of chance involved in which individuals succeed in reproducing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

So...in the case of these butterflies, is it REALLY evolution at play? Sounds more to me like natural selection.

just sayin' :shrug:

[mondo joe]

31. Look to your own definition for the answer:

"Evolution occurs when these heritable differences become more common or rare in a population, either nonrandomly through natural selection or randomly through genetic drift."

Evolution occurs through natural selection.

[The Cleaner]

32. maybe I'm playing devil's advocate here, but some say

they can readily observe natural selection at play while at the same time rejecting the theory of evolution as a whole. Maybe that's what I"m thinking.

[mondo joe]

34. "Some say" all sorts of things.

Natural selection is one mechanism of evolution.

If you're seriously asking about it, that's the answer.

If you're playing - well, it's still the answer.

[thereismore]

41. That's my point exactly. This is natural selection at work. No mutations needed.

Peace.

[thereismore]

40. That's fine. In that case, this is evolution. Evolution can be understood

as simply "change over time" or "change of allele frequencies from generation to generation", that's fine. But I know that people equate that with the evolution of yeast into dog, in other words, speciation. The example of these butterflies is not speciation. It is evolution in a different (much more microscopic) sense of the word. That's all. Peace.

[mondo joe]

16. You just described evolution.

But you confused evolution with speciation.

[thereismore]

42. Yes, I agree. The example describes natural selection, which,

in your definition, is evolution. However, this is not the evolution of species that Darwin talks about (i.e., speciation). Peace.

[mondo joe]

45. Of course it's what Darwin talks about. Speciation is a dynamic of evolution -

but it's not synonymous with evolution.

[GaYellowDawg]

19. Holy crap

A change in allele frequencies is the very definition of evolution! Additionally, you can't glean from that article whether or not the mutation occurred before or after the advent of the parasite.

Were you aware that your contention about antibiotic-resistant bacteria contained an internal conflict? You state that antibiotic-resistant bacteria aren't as fit as other bacteria of the same species when not in the presence of antibiotics. Yet, when the bacteria "needed" it, the antibiotic resistance was handily there.

What mechanism do you propose for keeping those resistant bacteria from being eliminated over the span of years - perhaps billions - between the first appearance of those bacterial species and the widespread use of antibiotics, if they're less fit? It's like expecting to be able to put domestic sheep out on the Serengeti and have a certain percent of the sheep population survive unchanged - e.g., being the same old stupid sheep - for billions of generations.

It'd be much more likely that antibiotic resistance was a mutation that could have arisen many times within the population but only flourished when given the selective pressure of antibiotics, wouldn't it? The notion that a pool of less fit variations that contain solutions to manifold selective pressures are somehow maintained in a dark corner of a population and then spring to light when the pressure comes to bear is pretty unrealistic.

[thereismore]

43. Fine. What I meant was: this is not an example of evolution of species a la Darwin.

[The Cleaner]

26. Very interesting viewpoint, thanks.

Amazing how people can view things in 2 different ways. So maybe this was simply survival of the fittest here, not sudden mutations.

[mondo joe]

27. Evolution isn't "sudden mutations".

The poster you responded to has confused evolution with speciation.

In turn, it seems, you have confused it with mutation.

[Maddy McCall]

39. Are you saying that speciation isn't a dynamic of evolution?

[Maddy McCall]

33. Evolution IS mutation.

[mondo joe]

35. Mmm, not quite.

Mutation is one mechanism of evolution.

But evolution is more properly the spread of heritable differences in successive generations of a population.

There are mutations that do not spread at all, and so would not really BE evolution.

[Maddy McCall]

38. Absolutely.

"Mutation is one mechanism of evolution." Absolutely.

Let's not be so nitpicky. We can spend hours if you want to talk about the mechanics of evolution...I've got background in physical anthropology, and I can discuss the finer points of the topic, too. The poster to whom I was responding was proponing that mutations that result in a species survival is something separate from evolution.

It isn't.

[Bucky]

17. It's a MIRACLE!! Praise the Lord!!

He hears every sparrow fall from a tree! He spares the butterflies from Satan's microbes!

[The Cleaner]

21. Technically the theory of (human) evolution claims slow changes over long periods of time.

there is no evidence humans evolved in this manner, interesting article though. I am reminded of Jurassic Park: "Nature...it finds a way."

[ConsAreLiars]

36. Who told you that?

I thought genes tend to more like on/off switches. Any link?

[Akoto]

22. God just updated their virus scanners, that's all.

[Liberal Veteran]

24. "And he stretched forth his noodly appendage and conferred immunity on the faithful"

....the atheist butterflies died horrible death for their apostasy.

[SoCalDem]

37. It's because humans do not eat butterflies or hunt them for sport

:(

[Gloria]

44. Hey, when normal cells mutate into cancer cells....is that evolution or

creation?

Really, mutation seems to be the word here.....if we called evolution "mutation" would that get the fundies' panties in a knot?

PS--have you seen the bumper stickers that say..."Slime plus Time=evolution. Not me!" or somesuch...