paul Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 in which order did they evolve? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokele Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 IIRC, Animals and Fungi are the most recent, with plants splitting off right before, protists before that, and archaea and bacteria were the first (it's unclear whether one evolved from the other and which was first). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul Posted January 11, 2009 Author Share Posted January 11, 2009 thanks mokele. i asked this question on yahoo answers and was surprised at the confusion my question caused. hardly anyone (including graduates) seemed to know what i meant by 'kingdoms'. isn't 'kingdoms' standard taxonomy? also, the one person who wasn't confused reckoned they evolved in the following order; archaea; bacteria; protists; fungi; plants; animals; any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokele Posted January 11, 2009 Share Posted January 11, 2009 Well, "kingdoms" aren't often used anymore - we tend to refer to the three 'domains' (archaea, prokaryota, and eukaryota), which are based on cell structure, genetics, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 But Mokele is really really old so he knew what you meant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticLance Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 First : all life is equally ancient. It appears that the first life appeared 3 to 4 billion years ago (probably nearer 4 billion) and all life since has evolved from that original form. For this reason it is a bit misleading to think of primitive and advanced forms of life, since all life is equally advanced. Second : the divisions between kingdoms, once you go back in time, is not very distinct, and the fossil record is often scanty. This means that the point at which a particular kingdom first appeared is often vague. Sorry, but this means that the question cannot be answered with certitude. For example : we cannot say whether bacteria or archaeans arose first. Intuitively, we would think that the order was similar to what you stated 3 posts back. However, we could easily be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 IIRC the current consensus was that archaea and bacteria share a common ancestor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticLance Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 To Charon That is correct. The first 'life' was probably a self replicating molecule drifting in a solution of organic molecules, made by inorganic processes, and using the substances around it as raw material to make more molecules. Some would have become trapped in lipoprotein vesicles, making the first 'cell'. From the first such successful proto-life came all that followed, including archaeans and bacteria. What a lot of people fail to understand is that even small archaeans are highly complex and sophisticated organisms, after almost 4 billion years of evolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mabsj2 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 no one can tell the exact order of evolution of different kingdoms but my proposed order is Archaea - Eubacteria - Plants & Protists - Fungi & Animals the order is according to their complexity and habitat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Why, do you think, are archaea less complex than bacteria? Do not be confused by the name, it has historic reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WindwagonSmith Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Isn't there even (limited) debate on how many Kingdoms there are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Sure there is. I have not commented whether a distinction into six kingdoms actually makes sense or not, because afaik in most text books you will find the 5 or 6 kingdom classification. Mokele or other on this forum that deal more with taxonomy will likely be able to give more insight into this. E.g. Cavalier-Smith proposed in the 90s a system in which bacteria and archaea form one kingdom again (Bacteria), and the others are Protozoa, Animalia, Fungi, Plantae and Chromista. It actually resembles somewhat earlier classfication schemes (at least superficially). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now