Evolution: New Species and Old Species?

  • Thread starter pctopgs
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Evolution
In summary: I finally get the joke.In summary, the conversation discusses the evolution of species and how it relates to taxonomy and classification. It is mentioned that evolution occurs on a population level and not on an individual level. The names given to different taxonomic ranks are arbitrary and what is important is the shared ancestral population. It is also discussed how a new species would be named and classified in the case of human evolution.
  • #1
pctopgs
20
0
OK so we all know that when (for example) a population of mammals evolves into something else, whatever it evolves into it will still be a mammal, but it won't be able to produce viable offspring...

This is well understood for taxonomic classes (like mammals) but what about species? What if humans evolved into something else? The new species will still be classified as human, but will the "human" species become a family? if so then will the family "hominidae" become a taxonomic order? Then what about Primates, Mammalia etc?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
pctopgs said:
OK so we all know that when (for example) a population of mammals evolves into something else, whatever it evolves into it will still be a mammal, but it won't be able to produce viable offspring...

That's because you are thinking about it wrong. Evolution doesn't work by some organism becoming the "first" of a new species. It works on populations. Specifically the allele frequencies of populations changing over time. No organism is going to give birth to something so different that it will be a new species over night, nor will it not be able to interbreed with the rest of the population. Its a population that evolves: not individuals. Very important concept for understanding evolution.

pctopgs said:
This is well understood for taxonomic classes (like mammals) but what about species? What if humans evolved into something else? The new species will still be classified as human, but will the "human" species become a family? if so then will the family "hominidae" become a taxonomic order? Then what about Primates, Mammalia etc?

"Class, family, mammal" etc, these are meaningless names given to something real. What is real is the coalescent node it describes.

So like you mentioned above, whatever "it" evolves into will till belong to the "kind" mammal. This is because mammal describes a node, or "parent" populations if you will of all extant populations which descend from that one.

The ancestral population of "mammal" occurs in the past, so any descendents of extant members will always and forever belong to that "kind" no mater what new nodes they create through branching of their lineage and no matter what we decide to name said nodes. Remember the rank is arbitrary, its simply to make it possible for us to converse on the issue. What mattered was that coalescent point--That shared ancestral population who is no longer a live.
 
  • #3
bobze said:
That's because you are thinking about it wrong. Evolution doesn't work by some organism becoming the "first" of a new species. It works on populations. Specifically the allele frequencies of populations changing over time. No organism is going to give birth to something so different that it will be a new species over night, nor will it not be able to interbreed with the rest of the population. Its a population that evolves: not individuals. Very important concept for understanding evolution.
Thanks for the response, but I did say population of mammals. This is besides the point and I thought elaborating on it would be unnecessary since we all know it. :)
"Class, family, mammal" etc, these are meaningless names given to something real. What is real is the coalescent node it describes.

So like you mentioned above, whatever "it" evolves into will till belong to the "kind" mammal. This is because mammal describes a node, or "parent" populations if you will of all extant populations which descend from that one.

The ancestral population of "mammal" occurs in the past, so any descendents of extant members will always and forever belong to that "kind" no mater what new nodes they create through branching of their lineage and no matter what we decide to name said nodes. Remember the rank is arbitrary, its simply to make it possible for us to converse on the issue. What mattered was that coalescent point--That shared ancestral population who is no longer a live.

Yeah thanks again for the reply, but if the human species was to evolve into a new species then does "Human" get reclassified as a genus and whatever humans evolved into will then be classified as "species", or does "human" stay classified as species and whatever the humans evolved into gets a new taxonomic rank? I guess this is more of a taxonomy question..
 
  • #4
pctopgs said:
...but if the human species was to evolve into a new species then does "Human" get reclassified as a genus and whatever humans evolved into will then be classified as "species", or does "human" stay classified as species and whatever the humans evolved into gets a new taxonomic rank?...

Are you referring to anagenesis? In that case the 'old humans' are still a species.Check en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anagenesis
 
Last edited:
  • #5
pctopgs said:
Yeah thanks again for the reply, but if the human species was to evolve into a new species then does "Human" get reclassified as a genus and whatever humans evolved into will then be classified as "species", or does "human" stay classified as species and whatever the humans evolved into gets a new taxonomic rank? I guess this is more of a taxonomy question..

I suppose it depends on who is doing the naming. Conventionally the "discovering" biologist gets to name it. In the case of a new taxonomic rank it would probably have to be agreed upon by ICZN (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature).

If Homo sapiens sapiens split into new "species" they'd probably be classed as new subspecies and eventually we'd vet some new kind of rank (remember though, ranks are arbitrary). Such that their new names would Homo sapiens sapiens new name 1 and Homo sapiens sapiens new name 2
 
  • #6
bobze said:
If Homo sapiens sapiens split into new "species" they'd probably be classed as new subspecies and eventually we'd vet some new kind of rank (remember though, ranks are arbitrary). Such that their new names would Homo sapiens sapiens new name 1 and Homo sapiens sapiens new name 2

Homo superior
In my interior
But from the skin out I'm
Homo sapiens too
I'm Homo sapiens like you
- Pete Shelley

omg, I've been singing that song at the top of my lungs for decades and only today I discover it is all about homosexuality. :smile:
 

FAQ: Evolution: New Species and Old Species?

1. What is the theory of evolution?

The theory of evolution is the scientific explanation for how species have changed and diversified over time. It proposes that all living organisms share a common ancestor and have evolved through natural selection, genetic variation, and adaptation to their environment.

2. How are new species formed through evolution?

New species are formed through a process called speciation. This occurs when a population of a species becomes isolated from the rest of its species and evolves independently, leading to the development of distinct characteristics and eventually a new species.

3. Can old species still be found in the world today?

Yes, old species can still be found in the world today. The theory of evolution does not state that all species must go extinct in order for new ones to emerge. Many species have remained relatively unchanged over millions of years, while others have evolved into new species.

4. What is the evidence for evolution?

There is a vast amount of evidence for evolution, including the fossil record, comparative anatomy, molecular biology, and biogeography. These various lines of evidence all support the idea that species have evolved and continue to evolve over time.

5. Can evolution be observed in real-time?

Yes, evolution can be observed in real-time. Examples of this include the evolution of antibiotic resistance in bacteria and the evolution of different bird beak shapes in response to changes in food availability. These observations provide direct evidence for the process of evolution and how it can occur over short periods of time.

Back
Top