Species form when fish booted out of home [Speciation]

ABC Science Online ^ | 24 August 2004 | Anna Salleh

[PatrickHenry]

Everybody be nice.

[PatrickHenry]

Evolution Ping! This list is for the evolution side of evolution threads, and maybe other science topics like cosmology.
See the list's description in my freeper homepage. Then FReepmail me to be added or dropped.

[martin_fierro]

Is a Darwin Award appropriate here?

< |:)~

[PatrickHenry]

Pic from the article:

[RightWhale]

What is the difference between this goby and its ancestral goby? Future goby experts want to know.

[AndrewC]

sought refuge in another species of coral that wasn't being used at the time.

No other fish could pay the rent. HAHAHA

[PatrickHenry]

I donno. I'm starting to realize that threads about fish -- even evo threads -- aren't very popular. Next time I'll stick with mammals. Dinosaurs are always good. Birds too. But not fish.

[RightWhale]

Maybe it's the sympatric speciation. What is that?

[PoorMuttly]

Aw...don't give up....Muttly appreciates these articles.

...even if they just make him hungry.

[RadioAstronomer]

Muttly appreciates these articles.

So does "Rades" :-)

[megatherium]

A colleague where I teach studies sympatric evolution in leafhoppers. These are very partial to specific host plants. (Leafhoppers suck plant juices for a living.) Populations in close geographic proximity can form new species if they happen to jump to new host plants. Leafhoppers are well-studied because they are significant plant pests (they are disease vectors in corn and also grapes).

The opposite of sympatic speciation is allopatric speciation, where new species form when a species is cut into subpopulations that are not in contact with each other (e.g., by the formation of a mountain range that geographically isolates populations). This is offered as an explanation for the lack of transitional forms in the fossil record: new species form in out-of-the-way, isolated regions; cut off from the main population. Imagine a mountain range forming, and isolating a subpopulation, which is subject to changing conditions and therefore adapts to the new conditions. A new species forms but is still isolated. But suppose conditions change, so a wide area is now hospitable to the new species. It will spread to the new area. This has the effect of making the new species suddenly appear in the fossil record (the relatively few transitional forms are only in a relatively limited geographical area, which may well have not been preserved in the fossil record).

[headsonpikes]

Dinosaurs are always good.

Dinosaurs are so 4004 B.C!

[RadioAstronomer]

Welcome to the science threads. :-)

[SC Swamp Fox]

So....those folks over at Liberty Post are forming separate species?

[Southack]

"Species form when fish booted out of home [Speciation]"

More accurately, new species form when their old DNA is changed.

What is in dispute is how, who, or what instigates such genetic reprogramming.

5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires

[MacDorcha]

i love the part where they provide a half a million year span as a possible time for species deviation.

thats right up there with Kerry being "somewhere near Cambodia"

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Doctor Stochastic]

What is the difference between this goby and its ancestral goby?

Similar but not quite the same as the difference between the Rockies and the Ancestral Rockies.

[Doctor Stochastic]

A new (or even a ring) species of bitter vetch probably wouldn't draw much attention either. (Except from Canadians with their "ers.")

[PatrickHenry]

This is offered as an explanation for the lack of transitional forms in the fossil record: new species form in out-of-the-way, isolated regions; cut off from the main population.

Darwin suggested that, and it's a satisfactory explanation for both the scarcity of transitionals, and their "sudden" appearance. Satisfactory except to the 'noids, for whom only inexplicable explanations will suffice.