Hey guys!I'm new here and I really need some help on this project I'm doing
I have to pick a species that is currently evolving, but then again the term evolving can mean many things.
I'm not exactly sure, at this point what my teacher specifically means by evolving.
My opinion on evolving, was that it was a term for change, a change of habit or change of physical attributes or allele that the species acquires or altered, because isn't evolution literally constantly happening?
Take people for example. When a child is just learning words, a new language, it is technically evolving because it is gaining attributes for itself that it didn't have before, that it will keep for the rest of its life. By technically, I mean just that one child will be evolving as person into who he/she will be in the future, a more individual look than a species wide look is what I'm saying, but can that still be argued for a valid evolution feat? Not saying that's what I'm going with (the child stuff), I made that up on the fly based on my opinion of evolution
Okay, now the main part I need help with is this:
Saiphos Equalis or otherwise known as yellow-bellied three toed skink, was recently discovered producing offspring via life birth.
It's posted nearly everywhere, national geographics, other science websites, etc.
Okay, however I refined my search and move a couple of valid sites that highlight the same exact thing back in 2000 and how saiphos equalis has notched the ability to the do both types of reproduction quite a while ago.
The thing that forces it to choose between live birth or egg, is the environment, cold or hot relatively for each one.
Now, being said that, I don't really have a valid argument for evolution of the saiphos equalis do I now?
When the saiphos equalis is reproducing, the new organism intakes most of it's calcium through the egg shell.
However, in live birth, the egg shell is thinned out, until it resembles a membrane.
This results in less calcium for the organism, and can result in bone deformations/smaller bone structure/more fragile bones compared to saiphos equalis in a more warmer region who use eggs as a way of reproducing.
THAT population of Saiphos equalis living in a cold region reproducing via live birth will have different characteristics in the long run compared to the population in the warmer area.
Also, because of the fact that the female is holding the organism longer inside of it, that means it needs to keep providing it food, and a way to eject the organism out without killing it because of the lack of a shell to protect it.
Because the organism is getting bigger, it will need more food than one in a female that is reproducing via egg (released sooner, therefore does not require as much nutrients), the blood vessels supplying the uterus with nutrients will increase in number. That is a piece of information (not word for word) that I picked up off a couple of websites after piecing it together.
Can this not be argued for as evolution?
The bone structure, density, size could be different from another group of saiphos equalis.
There will be more blood vessels leading to a uterus.
There are generally two separate population of seiphos equalis in Australia, one in the mountain reigons of NSW and one along the coast. The mountains are the more colder regions and the coast the warmer ones.
Basically, my opinion of what evolution is, is that it is change, but not just change in the alleles of an organism (what my teacher is implying I believe), but there are other things that can be considered evolution because evolution in it's simplest terms means change. Do you guys think I can make a valid argument for my opinion against my teacher on evolution?
Sorry, this is a little frantic, it is probably really messy and might not flow well from one sentence to another, but I really need help and I'm very sleepy right now
.
Quick Reply
