Re: News: Dramatic reverse evolution among fish species.

On May 20, 6:25 pm, hersheyh <hershe...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 20, 7:37 pm, Ye Old One <use...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Tue, 20 May 2008 21:59:39 GMT, Faux_Pseudo <Faux.Pse...@xxxxxxxxx>
enriched this group when s/he wrote:

_.-In talk.origins, Ye Old One wrote the following -._
The researchers at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Centre found that
while in the late 1960s, only 6 percent of sticklebacks were
completely plated, today 49 percent are fully plated and 35 percent
are partially plated, with about half of their bodies shielded in bony
armor.

"We propose that the most likely cause of this reverse evolution in
the sticklebacks is from the higher levels of trout predation after
the sudden increase in water transparency," said senior author
Catherine "Katie" Peichel.

Thats not 'reverse evolution'.  The ones who can't survive without
armor are being less successful than those who have armor.  Its just
evolution.

I agree.

--
Bob.

But...but...THEY'RE STILL FISH!  And still sticklebacks at that.
Besides didn't they pose the fish for the pictures of the armor.  And
it is just adaptation of pre-existing variation rather than
evolution.  That would require a stickleback giving birth to a bass.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

And it didn't happen anyhow. They were there all the time, just
couldn't be seen because of the murky water!

Noone saw even one change!

Harry K

.

Relevant Pages