Stories tagged evolution

U of Michigan scientists find evidence that suggest the answer lies in evolution and has little to do with modern lifestyles.


A model and a fossil show how Tikaalik Roseae might have lived in shallow stream beds about 375 million years ago.

What lived in water, could do push ups and might be the missing link in the evolution of sea creatures and land animals?

It’s Tiktaalik roseae, a crocodile-like creature that lived most of the time in the water, but ventured on land occasionally. Fossil remains of the large, nearly 400-million-year-old creature were recently found north of the Arctic Circle in Canada.

It’s the first solid fossil evidence that shows the transformation of aquatic animals into being land creatures. Tiktaalik specimens that were found range in length from four to nine feet long and look like a cross between a fish and a crocodile. They swam in shallow streams in what at the time, around 375 million years ago, was believed to be a subtropical climate. Tiktaalik were meat eaters.

The key that makes researchers believe it went up onto land is that Tiktaalik’s front fins had a bone structure that is much like a shoulder, upper arm, elbow, forearm and wrist. It’s believed the creatures would slither out of the water and pull themselves around on land much like seals do today.

The head structure of Tiktaalik is also a piece of evidence in the water-to-land evolution. It had a crocodile-like head, including eyes on top of the skull rather than on the side, like fish. It could also move its head independently of its shoulders like land animals can do today. But the creature’s jaws and snout were very fishlike. Researchers think it might have had both a set of lungs and gills for breathing. But like fish, it had scales and fins.

Scientists are planning to return to the Artic region to do further digging, but due to the cold climate there today, there is just a short window for doing field research. But much of what scientists are seeing in Tiktaalik confirms their guesses as to how water creatures could eventually convert to land animals.

The new findings were published in a recent edition of the journal Nature. Researchers have set up their own Tikaalik website with much more information about the discovery.


Scientists in Maryland have put together a family tree for cats. Using DNA evidence, they found that the first cats evolved in South East Asia around 11 million years ago. The Panthera genus, which includes lions, tigers and jaguars, evolved first. Various other groups evolved rapidly, with the final group, the ancestor of the domestic house cat, emerging in Africa and Europe about 6.5 million years ago.

Confuse-a-cat: The evolutionary history of cats is quite a head-scratcher!

According to
this blogger,
the interesting thing about this study is that it was done entirely by genetics — by comparing DNA samples. Species with similar DNA are considered to be close relatives. The more traditional way of figuring out evolutionary relationships — by studying fossils — was less helpful in this particular case. Cat fossils look very much alike, and it can be extremely difficult to figure out exactly which species is related to which. Especially in a family like the cats, where the different animals moved around a lot. (According to the study, the ancestors of the cheetah started in South East Asia, moved to North America, and then back to Asia / Africa!)

Just goes to show that evidence for evolution comes from many different sources.

* (Yes, it's another obscure reference to pop songs from Gene's formative years...)


Scientists at Rutgers University in New Jersey have discovered that the amount of oxygen in the Earth's atmosphere has more than doubled over the last 205 million years.

By studying samples of seafloor material going back millions of years, they determined that the atmosphere was only 10% oxygen during the time of the dinosaurs. It rose as high as 23% by 40 million years ago. (The air is 21% oxygen today.) That's about the time that really large mammals, like elephants and rhinos, started to emerge.

Oxygen levels may have affected the evolution of mammals. These warm-blooded creatures need three to six times as much oxygen as a reptile of the same size. The lack of oxygen may have prevented them from growing very large. But as oxygen levels increased, mammals could start getting bigger.


A visitor to this website recently posted this question:

How is evolution proved right? How is there proof of this "chance?" There are many other ways people say the earth was created; which is right? Is there a God that created the world? Or did everyone simply evolve? Whatever you believe, how do you prove yourself right?

Here is the Science Museum of Minnesota's official position on evolution.

That said, "proof" is really the crux of the issue.

All explanations of the Earth's creation other than evolution basically say that life is too complicated to explain by natural processes; something outside of nature must have created it. The only way to prove or disprove an idea like that is to look outside of nature. And once you go outside of nature, you're no longer doing science.

Science is a way of looking at the world, asking questions about nature and looking for answers in the natural processes around us. It works on one simple rule: show us the evidence! Show us an experiment in the lab or an observation in nature, but you have to point to something real that can be seen or measured. And then you have to come up with an explanation for what you've seen. You have to test your explanation by doing another experiment or making another observation that supports you. And if the results don't match, you know your explanation was wrong.

In science, a theory is an explanation that accounts for all the evidence. Atomic theory explains how matter works. Gravitational theory explains how gravity works. And evolutionary theory explains how life has changed over time.

Evolution is both a fact and a theory. The word has two meanings. First, it means "the history of life on Earth." And there's no denying that life has changed over the last 500 million years-go to the Dinosaurs and Fossils Gallery and see for yourself. But evolution also means "the explanation of HOW those changes have occurred." Scientists use the word theory for explanations that account for all the evidence.

And there is a lot of evidence for the theory of evolution. Every fossil that's ever been found; every animal that ever lived; every cell in your body-all of these support evolution. Scientists have been poking and prodding and testing the theory for 150 years, and have written tens of thousands of papers on the subject. Evolution is the best explanation we've ever had for the history of life on earth. (In terms of experiments and observations, it has been said there is more solid evidence for evolutionary theory than for atomic theory-and no one doubts the existence of atoms!)

Evolution happens every day, all around us. The bird flu that's been in the news is an example of evolution in viruses. New breeds of farm plants and animals are examples of evolution. And every baby that is born today will inherit traits from its mother and father, and so also be an example of evolution in action.

Science is really good at explaining WHAT and HOW: what our bodies are made of, how they work, how we evolved. But one thing science cannot do is explain WHY. Why are we here? What is our purpose? What is life's meaning? For that, you need religion.

OK, so what is evolution?
Evolution, by the most basic definition, is the profound, ceaseless change in life forms through time.

Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace were the first scientists to call this change in life over time "natural selection," although many others have contributed to the idea. (Changes in the theory of evolution have been made since Darwin's original proposal, yet his main theory stands firm.)

The theory of natural selection is based on three principles:

  • Organisms produce more offspring than can survive and reproduce.
  • Those that do survive tend to be better adapted to local environments.
  • Most adaptations are genetic, so they can be passed from parent to offspring.

Generation by generation, organisms that are better adapted to their environment in some way survive to pass on their advantageous qualities.

Evolution is not purposeful: it does not work toward a specific end or create better or worse organisms. Species evolve by adapting to particular niches in their environments, but the genetic mutations that lead to these adaptations occur by chance. An organism cannot will itself to mutate in a beneficial way. If its niche disappears, the species may become extinct or it may adapt to new conditions, but the failure to do so does not imply some kind of defect.

Evolution does not occur "for the good of a species." It operates at the level of individual organisms over many generations. A whole population does not simultaneously evolve a new trait; instead, the new trait evolves in one or a few organisms, which pass it on until the population is dominated by organisms having that trait.

Even more evidence of evolution
As humans, we share features with all living life forms, past and present. The more specific these features are, the more recently scientists think they evolved. For example, fingernails-a feature we share with all primates-evolved 30 million years ago. We have the same basic anatomical plan as all other vertebrates, which evolved 500 million years ago. And our cells'ability to use oxygen goes all the way back to our relationship with plants, fungi, and bacteria, which evolved over 1,000 million years ago.

Here are other examples of evidence for evolution:

  • Some animals have organs that serve no purpose but have a function in other species. Such a structure is referred to as vestigial. Whales, for instance, possess useless pelvic bones left over from their land-dwelling ancestors. Fossil whales are found with tiny limbs that became increasingly unimportant.
  • Many closely related species live in proximity to one another but are separated by a geographical barrier. (It was observations like this on the Galapagos Islands that helped Darwin formulate his theory of natural selection.) For example, two similar species of fish live separated by Central America: one in the Gulf of Mexico, and the other in the Pacific Ocean. They evolved when the Isthmus of Panama formed and separated their common ancestor's population into two groups. If the fish had not evolved after they were separated, the same species would live on both sides of the isthmus. And if they hadn't descended from a common ancestor, they wouldn't be so similar.
  • As we develop more types of antibiotics, new resistant strains of bacteria evolve through natural selection. Many crop pests have also evolved strategies to cope with our use of pesticides. Some species of grass have even evolved ways of thriving on industrial waste.
  • Through artificial selection, humans have developed new plants and animals. By manipulating genes, we have obtained many different types of crop plants-some produce greater yields, some produce higher concentrations of their own natural pesticides, and some are more resistant to drought. From a very basic canine type, we developed many different breeds of dogs over the last few thousand years. Artificial selection is somewhat analogous to natural selection; the difference is in the selective force-humans, instead of nature.
  • All multi-celled creatures share distinct genes for developing body plans (like plans for limbs, eyes, etc.). These genes, called homeotic genes, are incredibly similar in all animals, even among animals as different as fruit flies and chimpanzees.

We recently reported on the discovery of a Tyrannosaurus Rex femur bone with preserved fleshy tissue inside. Thanks to Science Magazine we can bring you some close up photos of these unique finds. Some of the photos here are of a modern ostrich. Try comparing the Tyrannosaurus Rex finds with those of a modern bird like the ostrich (pictured below).

Tyrannosaurus Rex Vascular Canals


In the field of paleoanthropology, or the scientific study of extinct members of human ancestry, scientists are often asked to stake their reputations on a single claim or hypothesis. The interesting thing about the claims that scholars attempt to make is that they are often based on the very small number of specimens that are available for research. This atmosphere often creates an intense series of lively debates between scholars over the interpretation of their sometimes limited data.