- #1
timeuser84
- 56
- 4
Hi again, questions in the title, hope you are all doing good and have a nice day
Sorry, only see one question in your title...timeuser84 said:questions in the title
This is quick to googletimeuser84 said:Hi again, questions in the title, hope you are all doing good and have a nice day
Not much in terms of looking of what's posted back though. This and the love post PT 1 and 2.DaveC426913 said:He meant question's in the title.
He's a man of brevity.
How do you mean anatomically herbivorous?lata chaudhary said:yes, Humans are naturally Omnivores and we're anatomically herbivorous.
I have to be honest and say that I have real difficulty in linking Ecology with Evolution, I think the two ideas are almost mutually exclusive. I suspect that the extensive discussions that attempt to justify how they approach the subject in the Ecol Evol article is telling.jim mcnamara said:The answer is yes, humans evolved to be omnivores, i.e., eat plant matter, and animal matter.
There are multiple choices for "why and how do we know?". One example: humans cannot synthesize vitamin B12 at all.
Humans must rely on the food they eat to supply them with required nutrients like vitamin B12.
Plant matter has no Vitamin B12.
Omnivory solves the problem.
Requirements listed:
https://www.phelpsmemorial.com/six-essential-nutrients-our-bodies-need-and-why
Here is a discussion of the evolution:
Ecol Evol. 2019 Oct; 9(19): 10874–10894.
Published online 2019 Sep 11. doi: 10.1002/ece3.5049
Perhaps I misunderstand what you are saying but, various aspects of how feeding strategies have evolved have been studied.Laroxe said:We can't really trace the evolution of feeding strategies past the days the early origins of life because its a history of natural selection not development.
Laroxe said:I have to be honest and say that I have real difficulty in linking Ecology with Evolution, I think the two ideas are almost mutually exclusive. ...
Ecology sees the natural world in terms of interdependent stable networks and addresses changes as threats. The discussions really reflect a value system that reflects a desire for an unchanging natural environment and see's human agency as destructive. So there is considerable emphasis on extinctions, environmental damage, restoration of ecosystems and the reintroduction of species, which are discussed as having a functional role in the ecology.
Evolution on the other hand is essentially about how species adapt to an ever changing environment, extinctions are seen as an essential in the evolution of new species and inevitable.
Lots of input. What do you think?timeuser84 said:Hi again, questions in the title, hope you are all doing good and have a nice day
Sorry Billtre, I expressed what I was thinking very badly, I was trying to get away from the idea of evolution reflecting development within a species, and failed miserably. Organisms develop the ability to use what is available but of course the sources available totally depend on the environment.BillTre said:There are situations where the presence of various species in a species' environment are important to its evolution (either living or going extinct or in what way a species might be elaborated in evolution).
Examples: A parasite needs its host or it will go extinct. The availability of new species in a parasite's environment could provide a new evolutionary path that the parasite might take, to find and become specialized to a new host.
There could be lots of other examples involving new relationships of various kinds among species that might get introduced into a species environment (which includes other species in its environment).
There other things than just nutrients that get competed for, like space in the environment.Perhaps I misunderstand what you are saying but, various aspects of how feeding strategies have evolved have been studied.
The history of changes in the electron transfer chain have been studied and how it enabled living things to extract a chemical living from different redox pairs of chemicals. Indications of this can be found in genomes.
Here are some examples of redox pairs from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468867319300574
View attachment 325030
Olivia Judson also wrote a more general paper about the different ways biology makes use of energy through evolution: The energy expansions of evolution.
Nature Ecology & Evolution 1, 0138 (2017) | DOI: 10.1038/s41559-017-0138 | www.nature.com/natecolevol
Yes, humans are naturally omnivores. This means that we are capable of consuming both plant and animal-based foods for sustenance.
There are several pieces of evidence that support the idea that humans are omnivores. For example, our teeth are adapted to both grinding and tearing, our digestive system can process both meat and plant-based foods, and our ancestors have been consuming a diverse diet for thousands of years.
Yes, humans can survive on a strictly vegetarian or vegan diet. However, it is important to ensure that the diet is well-balanced and provides all necessary nutrients for optimal health.
There are potential health benefits to being an omnivore, as it allows for a diverse and balanced diet. Consuming both plant and animal-based foods can provide a wide range of essential nutrients and can help prevent deficiencies.
This is a complex and personal question, as opinions on ethics can vary greatly. Some argue that consuming animals is a natural part of the food chain, while others believe that it is unethical to harm and kill animals for food. Ultimately, it is up to individuals to make their own ethical decisions about their diet.