Koni Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 What are the differences of Microevolution and Macroevolution???... First Example: Tiger = 38 Chromosomes Lion = 38 Chromosomes In the Zoo they make fertil offspring of Hybrids of Tiger+Lion and of Lion+Tiger Second Example: Horse = 64 Chromosomes Donkey = 62 Chromosomes They make Mule Hybrids = 63 Chromosomes that are NOT fertil In the First example Macroevolution seems to be Microevolution in large time... In the Second example the Macroevolution seems to be one chromosom Number change... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted July 18, 2015 Share Posted July 18, 2015 For a start "Most ligers suffer from embryonic fatality or premature death,[7] and those that survive are often genetically or physically sterile and therefore unable to reproduce and continue their lineage.[8]" from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted July 18, 2015 Author Share Posted July 18, 2015 Thank you for your reply !!! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 Can someone tell me the differences of Microevolution and Macroevolution???... Thank you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 There aren't any. It's a made up distinction. It's like asking what the difference in the recipe is between a cake and a slice of that cake. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species. Despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evoscales_01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 Thank you for your replys!!! But I have read in a Biology Book that Macroevolution is an autonomous process and NOT microevolution in large times... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Thank you for your replys!!! But I have read in a Biology Book that Macroevolution is an autonomous process and NOT microevolution in large times... What biology book was this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 Macroevolution: Explanation, Interpretation and Evidence (Inderdisciplinary Evolution Research) 2015 Edition by Emanuele Serrelli and Nathalie Gontier Koni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 I'd like to see the relevant quote from the authors. If you aren't a creationist or a proponent of ID, then microevolution is just focused on the details, like natural selection, mutation, genetic drift, gene flow, while macroevolution is focused on the bigger picture, common descent, speciation, as well as environmental/geological influences over vast amounts of time. As Delta1212 mentioned, the recipe is the same whether you're looking at a slice of cake or the whole cake. I've seen creationists try to insist that microevolution is real (because it's pretty plainly happening every day), but macroevolution is not (mostly because of willful misunderstandings about what fossils are). Creationists don't want Earth to be very old, and don't look at all the evidence that supports speciation and common ancestry. They want to make a false distinction between the two different perspectives of the same phenomenon, for religious purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 I am NOT a creatonist. I believe in Darvinian Evolution... I have read a lot of Biology Books about Evolution!!! THANK you for your reply!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 I am NOT a creatonist. I believe in Darvinian Evolution... I have read a lot of Biology Books about Evolution!!! THANK you for your reply!!! Excellent! Darwin did the groundwork for evolutionary theory, and today it's arguably one of the strongest, best supported theories science has. Evolution is a fact, and the Theory of Evolution gets stronger every day, whether you look at the details or the big picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 Please can you write me a good Book about Macroevolution??? Or is it a MISTAKE to call it Macroevolution and Microevolution???... I personaly have a problem to separate them because you don't know where the Microevolution ends and where the Macroevolution starts... Second there are Animals Like the Penguin where you cannot say if it is a Bird or a Fish (like the Dolphins) because it is on the 1/2 way of the Evolution to a Fish Life!!!... Third Evolution always changes the species and never stops... So, the Lion and the Tiger can be two(2) separate species... but on another view they can be the same species with a different Phenotype... Koni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 Or is it a MISTAKE to call it Macroevolution and Microevolution???... I personaly have a problem to separate them because you don't know where the Microevolution ends and where the Macroevolution starts... Exactly! Evolution is measured in populations over vast amounts of time, but the changes to each generation are usually small. But no matter how many generations you're looking at, it's still just evolution. My favorite way to show this is the laryngeal nerve. In the first vertebrates, this nerve connected their gills to their brains. As these little fish evolved into everything else that has a backbone, some species lost their gill function, but later used it to form a larynx capable of making sounds. But the nerve connection, as the many various species evolved, got wrapped under the heart. As species grew in different ways and sizes, the laryngeal nerve grew longer, so instead of a short nerve from our brains to our throats, it goes down past the larynx, wraps under the heart, and then goes back to the throat. There's a great video of Richard Dawkins dissecting the throat of a giraffe and exposing this nerve. From the giraffe's brain, under the heart, and back up again to the larynx is a good four and a half meters. Evidence that small changes in allele frequency in populations over time eventually lead to really big changes and speciation. Even changes that don't make sense, or give benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted July 22, 2015 Author Share Posted July 22, 2015 Back to my First question... The Apes> Orangutan, Gorilla and 2 Chimpanzees have 2*23+XY = 48 Chromosomes Human has 2*22+XY = 46 Chromosomes One Ape Chromosome + Another Ape Chromosome = One Human Chromosome... HOW DID THIS HAPEN???... On one Egg or one Sperm???... On the Germ Line???... How did this Chromosomes-Number change spread into a population of Apeshumans???... THANK You for your Help!!! Koni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted July 22, 2015 Share Posted July 22, 2015 This is due to fusion of chromosome 2 in humans. Essentially it is a form chromosomal rearrangement (i.e. in other apes it is present as two separate chromosomes, in humans it is fused). Fusion or breakage can lead to symptoms but as a whole does stop the chromosomes from doing their work (e.g. mitosis still works out as the homologous areas still align with each other, even through a break). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted July 22, 2015 Author Share Posted July 22, 2015 You write that mitosis still works out as the homologous areas still align with each other...!!! If I understand right, so a fused Chromosome can still align with the two separate Chromosomes...!!! I didn't knew that this is possible...!!! Thank You very-very much...!!! You answered a question that I had a long time...!!! Have a nice Day - every Day !!! THANK YOU Koni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted July 30, 2015 Author Share Posted July 30, 2015 Hello I am just reading the German Book: Evolutionsbiologie from Ulrich Kutschera... By the definition of Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution, he writes that: Microevolution is when - as example - from a fish species-A they are evolved the fish species-B and fish species-C...with the same Body-architectur... Macroevolution is when - as example - a fish species-A is evolved to a amphibian species-B...with a different Body-architectur!!!... So, with this definitions, the evolution from Apes-Humans to Apes and Humans belongs to Microevolution... Where is then the Meso-evolution???... THANK You!!!... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted August 5, 2015 Author Share Posted August 5, 2015 The Evolution of Humans is Micro-evolution, Meso-evolution or Macro-evolution???... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delta1212 Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 The Evolution of Humans is Micro-evolution, Meso-evolution or Macro-evolution???... The evolution of humans from what? Single-celled organisms? Apes? Slightly-less-modern hominids? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted August 5, 2015 Share Posted August 5, 2015 The Evolution of Humans is Micro-evolution, Meso-evolution or Macro-evolution???... Do you see why, when we're talking about a single process that spans multiple generations, there is no meaningful distinction between micro/macro/meso. It's all the same, it works the same way, and the only difference is where you look on the scale of time. Go back to Delta1212's early example. You're asking if the recipe was different between the cake and various sized slices of the cake. The recipe is the same. Looking at a single species and how they've evolved to date is just slicing the cake differently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted August 5, 2015 Author Share Posted August 5, 2015 From the ancestor of Apes and Humans... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted August 5, 2015 Author Share Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) I understand very well that it is only EVOLUTION and not micro-meso-macro... But in all the Biology Books they write about micro-evolution and macro-evolution... 1a) micro-evolution is evolution inside a group of organisms which make SEX together... (anagenesis) 1b) macro-evolution is evolution between two(2) separeted groups which don't make SEX together... (kladogenesis) 2a) micro-evolution is evolution of an organism to another NEW organism with the same body-architectur... (from a frog species to another NEW frog species) 2b) macro-evolution is evolution of an organism to another NEW organism with a different NEW body-architectur... (from a amphibian species to another NEW reptile species) So, we can add the aboves to: micro-evolution = 1a meso-evolution = 1b = 2a macro-evolution = 2b So, with the above... from the common ancestor of Humans and Apes (australopithecus) to the Homo-Sapiens and Chimpanzees is it microevolution - macroevolution or mesoevolution???... IF we Look at the same features it is meso-evolution... IF we Look at the different features it is macro-evolution... I understand that it is only EVOLUTION !!! But I have to ask... THANK You !!! Edited August 6, 2015 by Koni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koni Posted August 7, 2015 Author Share Posted August 7, 2015 Can you read please my above reply and answer me WHY all the Biology Books write about Microevolution and Macroevolution???... (Not only the Kreatonists but the Evolutionists also...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CharonY Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 The terms can be used in a number of contexts. For example if you are talking exclusively about large scale changes (say, in paleoecological context) it is clear that you are talking about e.g. clades or other larger groups rather than, say small molecular changes within a population. Microevolution is then used to delineate the opposite situation (e.g. talking about allele variation in a single population). I.e. a common use is to delineate changes that above or below the species level or equivalent. Obviously the boundaries are (as the species concept in self) not strictly defined. It is just sometimes a convenient term to establish context. Also, there are sometimes uses that are not typical (especially in blogs but sometimes also in poorly written highschool textbooks). Note that evolutionism is never used in the scientific community. 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