this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2024
721 points (97.9% liked)
Science Memes
10531 readers
2445 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- !reptiles and [email protected]
Physical Sciences
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and [email protected]
- [email protected]
- !self [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Absence of paleontological evidence of change in appearance does not mean evolutionary stagnation
Doesn't it? It doesn't seem obvious either way. Are you an actual paleontologist, or just guessing?
Molecular biologist.
It's mostly a matter of what we don't know. Paleontological evidence certainly shows that horseshoe crabs didn't change much in their appearance. However, we just don't know to what extent other aspects of their biology are as conserved. Therefore, it is just unscientific to say that horseshoe crabs are 'living fossils' or that they didn't evolve for millions of years. They may have, they may not have
I came to mention the same. Static phenotype ≠ static genotype.
Makes me wonder, would epigenetic speciation be possible?
If anyone else is struggling, this reasonably basic article helped me https://sciencenotes.org/genotype-vs-phenotype-definitions-and-examples/
Sorry! We're both biologists, we get nerdy.
No I love it - that's why we're here.
I learned something today and hope to gently explain it to my degenerating/conservative father (but let's not get into that kettle of fustercluck!)
Much obliged ! I was just thinking these strings of letters kinda looked like words
Honestly, I'm pretty sure they post any old brain rot here and then have an AI fabricate supporting articles online just to mess with us...
It makes sense. I just wasn't sure how likely it would be for species to evolve in significant ways over a long time without obvious changes to the shape of their fossils. Difficult to spot evolution happens a lot, apparently:
Yeah exactly. I’m not a biologist but I am aware that horseshoe crabs are harvested for their blood and its unique properties. How much evolution (in the last 450MY) have they undergone in terms of their immune system and other microbiological processes? We may never know but I think it’s quite a stretch to assume “none!”
I would have to assume there's some ecological pressure they're either experiencing or shielded from. If they're under environmental pressure, they are either exceptionally developed to endure environmental changes or they're adapting to the environment in ways that don't reflect in their physiology. If they've just found a niche biome where the ecological conditions are fairly static, and they're well suited to the environment, what changes would you see other than some generic genetic drift?
One minute earth just did a great video about that https://youtube.com/watch?v=_skYZFmr0Lg