Which species's evolution is most successful?

Discussion in 'Biology & Genetics' started by Semon, Apr 30, 2004.

  1. Pete It's not rocket surgery Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,167
    Yes, but the discussion is specifically about "the most successful species".
    If you want to measure the success of a parent by the success of their descendants, then the only logical conclusion is to say that the first species was the most successful.

    I couldn't resist this snippet:
    There is a story that a cleric asked evolutionist J.B.S. Haldane what could be inferred about God from the works of nature. Haldane supposedly replied, "An inordinate fondness for beetles."

    Apparently a fifth of all known animal species are beetles, and half of those are weevils.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Pete It's not rocket surgery Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,167
    I don't know why anyone is considering mitochondria - chloroplasts are surely just as eligible, and much more numerous and widespread

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Pete It's not rocket surgery Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,167
    That's a very bold statement. First, I'm not sure that all mitochondria can be considered a single species.
    Second, allow me to quote the late, great, Steven Jay Gould:
    Food for thought!

    Here is another source, but of questionable reliability (BBC - AS Guru):
    And another one:
    whyfiles.org
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2004
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. paulsamuel Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    882
    why do you say that? chloroplasts are in plants, mitochondria are in plants and animals
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2004
  8. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    The most success species would then be the ancestor species that gave rise to the most other species, which would be something like the very first mother cell of all cells.

    Hence you desires to have a certain discussion might not be based on biological reality.
     
  9. paulsamuel Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    882
    Perhaps not now, but the endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria happened once from a single species of endosymbiont, presumably.

    Of course I agree emphatically with Gould, but there are not more bacterial organisms than all other cells of organisms combined and each cell can have many mitochondria. I think mitochondria win that round.
     
    Last edited: May 5, 2004
  10. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    It is actually not easy to find out which is the most abundant organism on this planet.

    Here is one contender

    Here is another opinion:


    A second one supporting Pseudomonas aeruginosa

    Or is it Krill?

    another opinion:

    A new one - nematodes:

    and then I had enough of searching in google...there is so much shit information on the WWW.
     
  11. Pete It's not rocket surgery Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,167

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    I was somehow under the impression that mitochondria - animals, chloroplasts - plants. Thanks for the correction!
     
  12. Pete It's not rocket surgery Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,167
    Think about what you're saying.

    You have an animal on on side of the scales, and an equal mass of bacteria on the other.
    Now, remove all the mitochondria from the animal. Remove an equal number of bacteria from the right. Have you removed all the bacteria from the scales?
     
  13. Pete It's not rocket surgery Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,167
    Like I said.

    If "most successful" = "most descendants" or "most radiation", then there is one very boring answer - the first one ever. Yay.

    Or, we could use a different measure of success; one that leads to an entertaining discussion...
     
  14. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    The most succesful species are:

    Monkey (any monkey) - because they are funny

    Bunny - Because they reproduce nicely

    Wasps - because they are the most feared creatures on earth

    mosquitos - because they can make any place on lovely earth a living hell (go to lapland at the wrong time of the year to find out)

    Atheists - they don't rely on their limbic system as much as theists.



    is this better?
     
  15. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    I'm going with spuriousmonkey on this: the most succesful speacies is, drum roll please

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    : "The species of life that is the ancestor of all other live on the planet" period, there can't be any arguing over that so everyone shut the hell up!!!!
    Most successful species that still alive well that’s a harder issue.
     
  16. spuriousmonkey Banned Banned

    Messages:
    24,066
    That would be me!
     
  17. paulsamuel Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    882
    I know what I'm saying and I know how to count!

    We're not talking about mass, we're talking about numbers.

    We're not talking about animals, we're talking about all eukaryotes and all their cells and all their mitochondria.

    Now you take all eukaryotic organisms, times the average number of cells in each organism, times the average number of mitochondria in each cell. Is that number equal to, less than, or greater than the number of bacteria in the world. I would say greater than, but I could be wrong.
     
  18. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    paulsamuel,

    I will go with "far less" mitochondria then bacteria. There are a roughly estimated 5x10^30 bacteria cells in the world. Look at it this way if half of all the biomass is prokaryotic cells, and only a small fraction of the weight of eukaryotes is of roughly equally sized to bacteria Mitochondria. Add that up and well there far less mitochondria cell for cell then bacteria.
    http://whyfiles.org/shorties/count_bact.html
     
  19. paulsamuel Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    882
    you could be right, i haven't really thought about it that much, but listen to this:

    there are around 6 X 10^9 humans with 1X10^14 cells each and with at least 10 mitochondria per cell = 6 X 10^24 mitochondria (that's a conservative estimate). That's just humans. Add in other organisms and you can see why I would think that there were more mitochondria.

    Question now is why do you think there are less?
     
  20. paulsamuel Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    882
    found:

    Each mitochondrion -- there are about 1,700 in every human cell -

    from: http://www.ancientdna.com/FAQ.htm

    making the final calculation ca. 6 x 10^26 mitochondria, just from humans!
     
  21. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,523
    There arn't 1700 per cell in all cells, it dependent on cell type: ovas have several thousand and skin cells have several dozen.
     
  22. paulsamuel Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    882
    I think that was an avg. #/cell, nevertheless, there are at least 10. then, as a conservative est., there are 6 x 10^24 mitochondria just in humans!!!!!!!!!!

    if your estimate of number of bacterial cells is correct, then there's no way there are more bacteria than mitochondria
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2004
  23. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    "They [bacteria] cannot team up to manage matter, energy, or other living processes on the scale of a centimetre, let alone on the scale of a city, country, nation, planet, solar system or galaxy."

    Yes, they can, it's called quorum sensing.

    "If enough bacteria are present (a quorum),... millions of bioluminescent bacteria might decide to emit light simultaneously so that their host, a squid, can glow-perhaps to distract predators and escape....researchers have shown that bacteria also use quorum sensing to form the slimy biofilms that cover your teeth and eat through ship hulls and to regulate reproduction and the formation of spores. "

    from Scientific American Feb 04

    Did you know that there are more bacteria cells in your gut than all of your body's cells combined? Bacteria may also have piggybacked on our space probes, and landed on Mars! They inhabit the sea floor down to unknown depths, and the coldest environments in antarctica.
     

Share This Page