Next Time You Bait A Hook With a Worm…

Consider this.

http://www.embl.de/aboutus/communication_outreach/media_relations/2014/140911_Heidelberg/

This study suggests that our earlier ancestors, pre fish I assume, may have been from the worm family. So many relevant details in the article, I’d have to darn near copy/paste them all. More efficient to just click the link, I think. If you are inclined that is.

There is a video there, but if there was a narration it was not present for me.

In a nutshell:

  • Notochord (1st vertebrate skeleton) probably evolved from muscle
  • Evolutionary origin of notochord likely older than assumed
  • Marine worm has muscle with same genetic signature, in same place

Notochord

A Case Of Convergent Evolution, Oh My!

I have to wonder what the creationists will say about this? The usual hand waving and wailing about how they are still crickets I suppose. This is another nail in the coffin for creationism.

I was perusing one of my favorite sites this morning National Geographic’s Phenomena, home of a handful of great science blogs. Ed Yong’s “Not Exactly Rocket Science” has the post titled “The Silence of the Crickets” (x2 which was odd, but read on)

There is a species of cricket on the Hawaiian island of Kauai that is being predated by a parasitic fly and I quote: “whose larvae burrow inside them and eat them alive.” These flies zeroed in on the crickets by listening to the characteristic cricket chirp, then did the nasty business of implanting eggs when they found the source of the chirping.

An observant professor Marlene Zuk, PHD, University of Michigan, who had been studying these crickets had noticed on subsequent trips that the crickets chirp was being heard less and less every trip. An investigation shows why. The crickets were caught, in real time, evolving wings that no longer allowed for chirping. The crickets that had flatter wings which were bad at chirping were surviving, because they were invisible to the parasites. The survivors offspring of course had wings unsuitable for chirping to the point now where there are hardly any chirpers left. Which is a pretty awesome story, but…

What is even awesome-er, is the neighboring island of Oahu has the same crickets, with the same problem, that also independently evolved flatter wings unsuitable for chirping, over the same time period as the crickets on Kauai! This evidence was brought about by genetic testing that showed:  “the flatwings are caused by a mutation on a single gene, somewhere on the X chromosome. But both mutations arose independently! So the same mutation, flatter wings, happened on both islands, roughly at the same time, in two different populations, in differing area of the genome.”

Absolutely fucking incredible.

Get the full story here: http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2014/05/29/the-silence-of-the-crickets-the-silence-of-the-crickets/

EDIT: Geez, I’m slow, my excuse is I was just on my first cup of joe when I posted this story…I get it now why the original post’s title was duplicated, 2 cases of mutations, on 2 neighboring islands…doh.

Also, I hate it when my attempts at posting links fail to work. I suppose a copy and paste will get you there. In the meantime anyone have link posting tips?

Your Inner Fish

It has been all day. I have yet to hear anyone say anything about Neil Shubin’s “Your Inner Fish” show last night. I thought it was fantastic. Such a classic case of using the theory of evolution to go to the place where the transitional species you are looking for should be in the geological column. Search out these known places where the geology is dated to the time period you are investigating. And BAM! They found what they were looking for. Tiktaalik was born. A modern success story if ever there was one. Based on the overlapping fields of biology and geology, using science for discovery.

Talk about the power of prediction, evolution has got it. 

It was such a good show covering embryology, DNA connections, Sonic Hedgehog genes, all about our inner fish, as well as the Tiktaalik discovery. I’ve waited all day and none of my usual blog spots have said a word, I haven’t heard any wailing from the usual creationist slime pits either. It just seems odd. So I thought I would do a post my self! If you have not seen it, it is a must watch program for anyone scientifically inclined, and I highly recommend it. I think there is supposed to be another show or two, I will be looking tonight for any follow ups.

Evidence

I recently encountered a very trollish troll on another blog (/waves @ Mak) This trollish troll likes to presume infinite knowledge and attempts to word game his way out of answering a direct question, and then red herring his way along with another question. I am done with this trollish troll and will not sully a good mans blog with more interactions with this trollish troll. However, I have had a couple of days to dwell on this last question, it just kept nagging at me and I think I have an answer that satifies me. This may not satisfy someone else’s take on the situation, but at this point in time, it suits me. The red herring question left to me was one of evidence. What would I consider evidence? I should hope that a guy with a blog entitled Evidence Based Reality, could come up with a decent explanation…

Evidence. Evidence comes in many categories, from weak, to good, to excellent.

Weak evidence would be hearsay, or that which would be circumstantial. As in perhaps someone being caught with a counterfeit 20. If you have one on you, it doesn’t mean you printed it in your basement, it could have been picked  up getting change at the gas station or the donut shop. Someone’s brother’s cousin that heard from someone else’s grandma that you were a counterfeiter would be hearsay, and lousy evidence.

Good evidence is much more convincing. Any reasonably intelligent parent can tell you a look on their childs face is evidence of their guilt in a matter. Let’s say you left the room, and when you came back, the fresh box of donuts you just bought was missing 1 glazed donut. Your child has glaze all over their hands. Between the look on their face and the glaze on their hands this is pretty convincing evidence they ate the donut, even though you did not see it happen.

Let’s consider a murder scene. Fingerprints, footprints, DNA from a strand of hair are all good evidence. All found together at a crime scene, and all matching a certain perp would start adding up to excellent evidence. The perp is now put at the scene, even though there is still a chance of their innocence of the crime. The more evidence made available makes all of the existing evidence stronger. Which brings us to…

Excellent evidence. This would be many converging lines of good evidence. Add up the fingerprints, footprints, DNA, toss in the murder weapon, a motive, plus a confession and you have probably found your murderer.

This kind of converging evidence is what we have for evolution, the age of the universe, and most science in general. Excellent scientific evidence is observable, repeatable, and falsifiable. When many lines of evidence from many different bodies of science converge and point to the same conclusion, I would consider this the strongest kind of evidence available.

This evidence that exists to support both evolution, and the age of the universe pretty much slam dunks straight into the trash can, the possibility of any bronze age mythologies being true.

Oh, and the kind of evidence that exists for religion? It’s weaker than weak. “Cuz reverend Billy Bob said so” is not evidence. “Cuz it says so right thar in my magic book of fables” is not evidence. “Cuz I feel the power of jayzus” is not evidence. “Cuz I know in my heart it must be true” is not evidence. “Because the sunset is beautiful, therefore my dog exists” is not evidence. “Because some philosophers or so called scientists have a certain predisposition to believing in some sort of creationism” is not evidence.

If you religious types have anything else to consider as evidence, I am certain the scientific community and many of us plain old non believing heathens would just love to hear it.

Convergent evidence for evolution : http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/lines_01

I thought this was an interesting read on the age of the universe: http://infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/bigbangredux.html

News From The Tiktaalik Front

Unless you are evolutionarily predisposed to living under a rock, you know the story behind Tiktaalik. For the rock dwellers out there I will elaborate. Back in 2004 Neil Shubin PHD made the Tiktaalik discovery. He reasoned, and rightly so, that if the theory of evolution was correct, (and it is) then a transitional fossil between fish and four legged land walkers would fall in the time period of roughly 380 million years ago. He decided that if this transitional creature was out there to be found, it would be found in rock layers dating back to that time. Mr. Shubin managed to get funding for an expedition, and went about finding this fossil. Found it he did. This predictable power of evolution is perhaps THE most important aspect of evoulutionary theory. An amazing discovery. Mr. Shubin later authored the book “Your Inner Fish” (which sadly I have yet to read) and apparently has been back to his Tiktaalik honey hole, fishing for more fossils.

Found them he did. The first Tiktaalik discovery was the front end of the animal with the head and front “feet.” This time they found the back half, completing the picture of this incredible animal. I am going to crib in part much of the story, which was realeased from here: http://www.uchospitals.edu/news/2014/20140113-tiktaalik.html   

“The discovery of well-preserved pelves and a partial pelvic fin fromTiktaalik roseae, a 375 million-year-old transitional species between fish and the first legged animals, reveals that the evolution of hind legs actually began as enhanced hind fins. This challenges existing theory that large, mobile hind appendages were developed only after vertebrates transitioned to land. The fossils are described by scientists in theProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, online on Jan. 13.

“Previous theories, based on the best available data, propose that a shift occurred from ‘front-wheel drive’ locomotion in fish to more of a ‘four-wheel drive’ in tetrapods,” said Neil Shubin, PhD, Robert R. Bensley Distinguished Service Professor of Anatomy at the University of Chicago and corresponding author of the study, which marks his inaugural article as a member of the National Academy of Sciences. “But it looks like this shift actually began to happen in fish, not in limbed animals.”

Discovered in 2004 by Shubin and co-authors Edward Daeschler, PhD, Associate Curator of Vertebrate Zoology at the Academy of Natural Sciences of Drexel University, and the late Farish A. Jenkins, Jr., PhD, of Harvard University, Tiktaalik roseae represents the best-known transitional species between fish and land-dwelling tetrapods.

A lobe-finned fish with a broad flat head and sharp teeth, Tiktaaliklooked like a cross between a fish and a crocodile, growing up to a length of 9 feet as it hunted in shallow freshwater environments. It had gills, scales and fins, but also had tetrapod-like features such as a mobile neck, robust ribcage and primitive lungs. In particular, its large forefins had shoulders, elbows and partial wrists, which allowed it to support itself on ground.

However, only specimen blocks containing the front portion of Tiktaalikhave been described thus far. As the researchers investigated additional blocks recovered from their original and subsequent expeditions to the dig site in northern Canada, they discovered the rear portion of Tiktaalik, which contained the pelves as well as partial pelvic fin material. The fossils included the complete pelvis of the original ‘type’ specimen, making a direct comparison of the front and rear appendages of a single animal possible.

The scientists were immediately struck by the pelvis, which was comparable to those of some early tetrapods. The Tiktaalik pelvic girdle was nearly identical in size to its shoulder girdle, a tetrapod-like characteristic. It possessed a prominent ball and socket hip joint, which connected to a highly mobile femur that could extend beneath the body. Crests on the hip for muscle attachment indicated strength and advanced fin function. And although no femur bone was found, pelvic fin material, including long fin rays, indicated the hind fin was at least as long and as complex as its forefin.

“This is an amazing pelvis, particularly the hip socket, which is very different from anything that we knew of in the lineage leading up to limbed vertebrates,” Daeschler said. “Tiktaalik was a combination of primitive and advanced features. Here, not only were the features distinct, but they suggest an advanced function. They appear to have used the fin in a way that’s more suggestive of the way a limb gets used.”

Tiktaalik pelves were still clearly fish-like, with primitive features such as an undivided skeletal configuration, as opposed to the three-part pelvic girdle of early tetrapods. However, the expanded size, mobility and robusticity of the pelvic girdle, hip joint and fin of Tiktaalik made a wide range of motor behaviors possible.

“It’s reasonable to suppose with those big fin rays that Tiktaalik used its hind fins to swim like a paddle,” Shubin said. “But it’s possible it could walk with them as well. African lungfish living today have similarly large pelves, and we showed in 2011 that they walk underwater on the bottom.” End Quote.

So to sum it up, Tiktaalik had developed “walking feet” well before it made its move to land. As well as rudimentary lungs and a ribcage. All of these traits made it (I would suspect) much easier for this creature to invade land, and go on to provide the evolutionary foundation for all vertebrates today. Absolutely amazing!  Even more awseome is this (also cribbed from the link above)  “Shubin will be hosting a three-part TV series based on his book “Your Inner Fish,” on PBS in April 2014, tracing the origins of the human body through the DNA of living animals and the legacies of now-extinct, but biologically important species such as Tiktaalik roseae.” It is safe to say I am really looking forward to this. Is it April yet?

 

 

Low Omega 3 Linked to Lower Brain Function

Interesting study reveals that low Omega 3 fatty acids, are related to lower reading skills, concentration, behavior, and learning ability.

If you know anything at all about the course of evolution, related to humans and our earliest ancestors, fish, it isn’t really all that much of a surprise that these O 3’s would be an important part of our diet…right? With a data set of nearly 500 participants, this is in my mind a significant study, with a significant conclusion, being that kids during their earlier years of development, would do well to have a good dose of Omega 3 intake. Probably could’t hurt us adults either.

http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2013/130905.html

No Freakin Way

.Image

Was the first thing that popped into my head when I saw this.

That pic is the first known biological gear mechanism. Full story here, http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/functioning-mechanical-gears-seen-in-nature-for-the-first-time …anyone who digs science, this is a must click link.

The short story is an insect known as an Issus, has a gear mechanism, by way of evolution, that synchronizes its legs for jumping. Allowing it to perform powerful jumps, and retain control throughout the jump, due to the accurate dispersal of energy to both legs at the moment the jump is initiated. 

As in many evolutionary traits (think embryology) this function is lost in adulthood, being present only in juvenile Issus.

Just…amazing.

 

 

Oldest Known Primate Fossil

New fossil described as the oldest known primate. 7 million years older than previously known primate fossils. This new find (well I say new find but according to the article, they have been working on the paper about this fossil for 10 years) has been dubbed Archicebus. 

Going by the tree representation at the link, this critter is at a major fork in our ancestral tree. If you like this kind of stuff, click the link below for a must read article. I do love living in the information age.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130605133552.htm

In a semi related topic, noted creationist, famed liar, and the P.T. Barnum of our time, Ken Ham…gets his trousers all in a bunch because someone called him an ape. It’s hilarious how he acts about the situation, as if he knows better, and implores his dim witted followers to go watch the video. Here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/aronra 

or here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/

Relative comments and conjecture at both sites. Did I mention how much I love living in the information age?

Hey Hambone, we are all apes…dumb-ass!

Evolution, “It’s Just a theory”

Recently I stumbled across a blog here (wordpress) that offered some opinion on the insidious Westboro Baptist Church. In the comments there is yet another of the multitudes that have no idea what a scientific theory is, let alone what the word theory means in that context. A comment  there:  “Actually, evolution isn’t a fact. It’s called a theory and it’s one that hasn’t been proven.”

You see this a lot in internet land, a wild misconception that is so easily explained, yet so widely used you almost have to think it is done on purpose. The only other option is that people who use this lame ass lie are mind numbingly ignorant. Either way, it goes a long way to illuminating the  mind of a creationist.

I could not overpower the urge to comment, so I did, and here is my reply:

“Bzzzzt! Wrong. Evolution only has 150 years of facts supporting its “Theory”

X-ians, please learn the definition of a scientific theory.

The scientific theory definition is basically “an explanation that best fits the evidence” This explanation can be revised upon the addition of new facts. Which is something you will never have. A scientific theory can also have strong predictive power, you know, being grounded in reality and supported by multiple lines of evidence. Science does not pretend to know everything (unlike religion) and is constantly striving to learn more about the world we live in, and places beyond. (also unlike religion, you just happen to have all the answers you think you need) A scientific theory is as close as you can possibly get to understanding a subject.

The layman’s definition of theory goes something like this: Billybob’s theory of why his tire is flat, is that Bigfoot came along and sucked the air out of it.

Now can you spot the difference? Given the level of disconnect I’ve seen this deep in the comments…I don’t have much hope of your answers being a “yes”. Please, please, learn to distinguish the difference here.This misunderstanding of the the use of the word theory, is far too commonplace. So much so I have to wonder if it isn’t intentional.”

I also did a follow up reply referring to another comment:

“There are plenty of Biblical scholars that have created tons of resources in support of the Biblical account of creation. It’s fascinating to study and I highly recommend it.” and…”Related to evolution, there’s plenty of science and math that disproves this.”

My reply: 

“So where is this fascinating information you keep jabbering about?
The “plenty of math and science that disproves this”? Show us where you are getting your information.

Dollar to a doughnut its AIG*, or the DI*. Both institutions dedicated to the keeping of the wool pulled over the rube’s eyes, with bogus scientists pretending to do science stuff. If they were really doing any science, where are the results? Where do they show the science they have done? What methods did they use to reach their conclusions? What credentials do their “scientists” have? Oh right…they don’t really “do” science, that stuff is too hard, all they do is stand on the sidelines proclaiming to know better than real scientists, and scream about how evolution cant work because (insert discredited mumbo jumbo here)

There is so much evidence to support evolution, that any genuine scientist will tell you that the theory, is a fact, Jack. AIG and the DI, are whats known as damage control.

Couple of questions: are you a YEC? Did man co-exist with dinosaurs? How old is the earth? Is the earth the center of the universe? Does the sun orbit the earth? Is the sky held up on 4 pillars? Do you believe that germ theory and the theory of gravity are just “theories”? Did you know that real scientists recently proved that there was never a genetic bottleneck of just 2 people? Were fossils put there to test your faith? Are fossils really as old as scientists say they are, or is there an issue with the dating technique? Why is it that every year a new flu vaccine has to be developed? Why do antibiotics lose their effectiveness? Is it plausible for a man to live inside a whale for 3 days? What is the secret behind steel* chariots and the resistance they have against god’s magic powers? Do you take medicine when you get sick, if so why? Is there an issue with the speed of light changing over time? Do you wear cotton blends? Do you know what rationalize means? I could go on and on, but that should be enough for your head to explode. Unless of course the CD is fully developed, then you will be fine.” …and I added this to address the OP: “Oh and the WBC is a fine example of the poison that is religion.”

In conclusion, the only people who would conflate the meaning of the word theory, are either hopelessly ignorant, or deliberately doing so in the hopes  the former will never bother to actually look it up and learn for themselves. This is a common condition apparently, and those that would take advantage of it, do so often. Authoritarianism, a topic for another day.

Here is the blog in question: http://faithfullydoubting.wordpress.com/2013/04/21/westboro-baptist-the-best-christians/

I said in a blog post recently something about NOT participating in an activity that can reduce your IQ by 50 points. Using either link below can most assuredly have that effect. Do so at your own risk.

*AIG :  www.answersingenesis.org

*DI:     http://www.discovery.org  

* I meant iron, instead of steel…