| Revision as of 19:08, 7 February 2007 view sourceGetAgrippa (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,766 edits →Genetic drift: Changed wording to eliminate red link. Maybe use random chance?← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:47, 7 February 2007 view source Harehawk (talk | contribs)7 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| Genesis 1 | |||
| {{otheruses4|evolution in biology}} | |||
| 1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. | |||
| {{seeintro}} | |||
| 2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. | |||
| {{evolution3}} | |||
| 3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. | |||
| In ], '''evolution''' is the change in the frequency of ] traits of a ] over successive generations. This is usually measured in terms of the variant ]s, known as ]s, that encode the traits. As differences in and between populations accumulate over time, ], the development of new ] from existing ones, can occur. All known ]s are related by ] through numerous speciations from a single ancestor.<ref name=Futuyma>{{cite book | last = Futuyma | first = Douglas J. | authorlink = Douglas J. Futuyma | year = 2005 | title = Evolution | publisher = Sinauer Associates, Inc|location = ], ] | id = ISBN 0-87893-187-2}}</ref><ref>{{cite book | last = Gould | first = Stephen J. | authorlink = Stephen Gould | year = 2002 | title = The Structure of Evolutionary Theory | publisher = Belknap Press | id = ISBN 0-674-00613-5}}</ref> | |||
| 4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. | |||
| 5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. | |||
| 6And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. | |||
| 7And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. | |||
| 8And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. | |||
| 9And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. | |||
| 10And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. | |||
| 11And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. | |||
| 12And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. | |||
| 13And the evening and the morning were the third day. | |||
| 14And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: | |||
| 15And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. | |||
| 16And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. | |||
| 17And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, | |||
| 18And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. | |||
| 19And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. | |||
| 20And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. | |||
| 21And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. | |||
| 22And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. | |||
| 23And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. | |||
| 24And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. | |||
| 25And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. | |||
| 26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. | |||
| 27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. | |||
| 28And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. | |||
| 29And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. | |||
| 30And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. | |||
| 31And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. | |||
| Genesis 2 | |||
| ]s, ] between populations, and the ] of genes during ] creates ] in organisms, which is randomized through ]. This variation is acted on by ], in which organisms that happen to have combinations of traits that help them to survive and reproduce will, on average, have more offspring, passing more copies of these beneficial traits on to the next generation. This leads to advantageous traits becoming more common in each generation, while disadvantageous traits become rarer.<ref name=Futuyma/><ref>{{cite journal | author = Lande, R. | coauthors = Arnold, S.J. | year = 1983 | title = The measurement of selection on correlated characters|journal = ] | volume = 37 | pages = 1210–1226}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | author = Haldane, J.B.S. | year = 1953 | title = The measurement of natural selection | journal = Proceedings of the 9th International Congress of Genetics | volume = 1 | pages = 480–487}}</ref> Given enough time, this passive process can result in varied ]s to changing environmental conditions.<ref name="understandingevolution">{{cite web | url = http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/evo_14 | title = Mechanisms: the processes of evolution | accessdate = 2006-07-14 | work = Understanding Evolution | publisher = ]}}</ref> | |||
| 1Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. | |||
| 2And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. | |||
| The theory of evolution by natural selection was first put forth in detail in ]'s 1859 book '']''. In the 1930s, Darwinian natural selection was combined with ] ] to form the ].<ref name="understandingevolution"/> With its enormous explanatory and ], this theory has become the central organizing principle of modern biology, providing a unifying explanation for the ] on Earth.<ref>{{cite news | first=PZ | last=Myers | authorlink=PZ Myers | title=Ann Coulter: No evidence for evolution? | date=2006-06-18 | publisher=scienceblogs.com | url =http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/06/ann_coulter_no_evidence_for_ev.php | work =Pharyngula | pages = | accessdate = 2006-11-18}}</ref><ref> Joint statement issued by the national science academies of 67 countries, including the ] ] (PDF file)</ref><ref>From the ], the world's largest general scientific society: (PDF file), </ref> | |||
| 3And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. | |||
| 4These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, | |||
| ==Basic processes== | |||
| 5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. | |||
| Evolution consists of two basic types of processes: those that introduce new ] into a population, and those that affect the frequencies of existing genes. Paleontologist ] once summarized this as "variation proposes and selection disposes".<ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.nybooks.com/articles/1151 |title= Darwinian Fundamentalism |accessdate=2006-08-01 |author= Stephen J. Gould |date=1997-06-12 |publisher=New York Review of Books}}</ref> There is a certain amount of variation in apparent traits, or ]s, in populations. This phenotypic variation is primarily the result of ]s, the specific genetic makeup encoded on ] molecules. There may be one or more functional variants of a gene or ], and these variants are called ]s. Most sites in the ] (i.e., complete DNA sequence) of a species are identical in all individuals in the population; sites with more than one allele are called ], or segregating, sites. Interactions between a genotype and the environment may also affect the phenotype through ]. | |||
| 6But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. | |||
| 7And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. | |||
| ===Variation=== | |||
| 8And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. | |||
| ] is often the result of a new mutation in a single individual; in subsequent generations the frequency of that variant may fluctuate in the population, becoming more or less prevalent relative to other alleles at the site. This change in ] is the commonly accepted definition of evolution, and all evolutionary forces act by driving allele frequency in one direction or another. Variation disappears when it reaches the point of ]—when it either reaches a frequency of zero and disappears from the population, or reaches a frequency of one and replaces the ancestral allele entirely. | |||
| 9And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. | |||
| 10And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. | |||
| Variation is also created during the production of ] and union at fertilization to produce a ] (there is ] that produce variation). In some organisms, like bacteria and plants, the lateral transfer of genetic material, or ], plays a significant role, and the mixing of genetic material by hybridization (mixing species) produces significant variation. | |||
| 11The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; | |||
| 12And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. | |||
| ===Heredity=== | |||
| 13And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. | |||
| </ref>]] | |||
| 14And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. | |||
| 15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. | |||
| ]'s work provided the first firm basis to the idea that heredity occurred in discrete units. He noticed several traits in peas that occur in only one of two forms (e.g., the peas were either "round" or "wrinkled"), and was able to show that the traits were: heritable (passed from parent to offspring); discrete (i.e., if one parent had round peas and the other wrinkled, the progeny were not intermediate, but either round or wrinkled); and were distributed to progeny in a well-defined and predictable manner (]). His research laid the foundation for the concept of discrete heritable ], known today as ]s. After Mendel's work was "rediscovered" in 1900, it was found that the concepts could have wide applicability, and that most complex traits were polygenetic and not controlled by single unit characters. | |||
| 16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: | |||
| 17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. | |||
| Later research gave a physical basis to the notion of genes, and eventually identified ] as the genetic material, and identified genes as discrete elements within DNA. DNA is not perfectly copied, and rare mistakes (]s) in genes can affect traits that the genes control (e.g., pea shape). | |||
| 18And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. | |||
| 19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. | |||
| A gene can have modifications such as ], which do not change the nucleotide sequence of a gene, but do result in the ] inheritance of a change in the expression of that gene in a trait. Another epigenetic mechanism is via ]s and ], which serve regulatory roles in gene transcription and translation. | |||
| 20And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. | |||
| 21And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; | |||
| Non-DNA based forms of heritable variation exist, such as transmission of the secondary structures of ]s or ] of patterns in the rows of cilia in protozoans such as ''Paramecium''<ref> | |||
| 22And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. | |||
| Beisson, J. & Sonneborn, T. M. (1965). Cytoplasmic inheritance of the organization of the cell cortex of Paramecium aurelia. Proc. natn. Acad Sci. U.S.A. 53, 275-282</ref> and ''Tetrahymena''.<ref></ref> Investigations continue into whether these mechanisms allow for the production of specific beneficial heritable variation in response to environmental signals. If this were shown to be the case, then some instances of evolution would lie outside of the typical Darwinian framework, which avoids any connection between environmental signals and the production of heritable variation. However, the processes that produce these variations are rather rare, often reversible, and leave the genetic information intact. | |||
| 23And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. | |||
| 24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. | |||
| ===Mutation=== | |||
| 25And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed. | |||
| {{main|Mutation}} | |||
| ] | |||
| Genetic variation arises due to ] mutations that occur at a certain rate in the ]s of all organisms. Mutations are permanent, transmissible changes to the ] (usually DNA or ]) of a ], and can be caused by: "copying errors" in the genetic material during ]; by exposure to ], chemicals, or ]es. In multicellular organisms, mutations can be subdivided into ''germline mutations'' that occur in the ]s and thus can be passed on to progeny, and ''somatic mutations'' that can lead to the malfunction or death of a cell and can cause ]. | |||
| Mutations that are not affected by natural selection are called ]s. Their frequency in the population is governed by mutation rate, genetic drift and selective pressure on linked alleles. It is understood that most of a species' genome, in the absence of selection, undergoes a steady accumulation of neutral mutations. | |||
| Individual genes can be affected by ]s, also known as ], in which a single ] is altered. The substitution of a single base pair may or may not affect the function of the gene, while deletions and insertions of base pairs usually results in a non-functional gene.<ref>Snustad, P. and Simmons, A. 2000. Principles of Genetics, 2nd edition. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New-York, p.20</ref> | |||
| Mobile elements, ]s, make up a major fraction of the genomes of plants and animals and appear to have played a significant role in the evolution of genomes. These mobile insertional elements can jump within a genome and alter existing genes and gene networks to produce evolutionary change and diversity.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Aminetzach YT, Macpherson JM, Petrov DA.| title = Pesticide resistance via transposition-mediated adaptive gene truncation in Drosophila. | |||
| | journal = Science | volume = 309 | issue = 5735 | pages = 764-7. | year =1992 }} </ref> | |||
| On the other hand, ]s, which may occur via a number of mechanisms, are believed to be one major source of raw material for evolving new genes as tens to hundreds of genes are duplicated in animal genomes every million years.<ref>{{cite book| last = Carroll S.B,. Grenier J.K., Weatherbee S.D. | title = From DNA to Diversity: Molecular Genetics and the Evolution of Animal Design. Second Edition| publisher = Blackwell Publishing| date = 2005| location = Oxford|id = ISBN 1-4051-1950-0 }}</ref> Most genes belong to larger "families" of genes derived from a common ancestral gene (two genes from a species that are in the same family are dubbed "]"). Another mechanism causing gene duplication is intergenic recombination, particularly "exon shuffling", i.e., an aberrant recombination that joins the "upstream" part of one gene with the "downstream" part of another.<ref>] and ] duplications also appear to have served a significant role in evolution. Genome duplication has been the driving force in the ] genome evolution, where up to four genome duplications are thought to have happened, resulting in species with more than 250 chromosomes. | |||
| Large chromosomal rearrangements do not necessarily change gene function, but do generally result in reproductive isolation, and, by definition, ]; in sexual organisms, species are usually defined by the ability to interbreed). An example of this mechanism is the fusion of two chromosomes in the '']'' genus that produced human chromosome 2; this fusion did not occur in the ] ], resulting in two separate chromosomes in extant chimpanzees. | |||
| ===Horizontal gene transfer=== | |||
| ] of all extant organisms, based on 16S ] ] sequence data, showing the evolutionary history of the ], ], ] and ]s. Originally proposed by ].]] | |||
| ] (HGT) is any process in which an organism transfers genetic material to another organism that is not its offspring. This mechanism allows for the transfer of genetic material between unrelated organisms and is a form of gene flow. | |||
| Many mechanisms for horizontal gene transfer have been observed, such as ], ], and ]ization. Viruses can transfer genes between species via ]. Bacteria can incorporate genes from other dead bacteria or ]s via ], exchange genes with living bacteria via ], and have plasmids "set up residence separate from the host's genome".<ref></ref> Hybridization is highly significant in plant speciation,<ref>{{cite journal | author = Rieseberg LH, Raymond O, Rosenthal DM, Lai Z, Livingstone K, Nakazato T, Durphy JL, Schwarzbach AE, Donovan LA, Lexer C.| title = Major ecological transitions in wild sunflowers facilitated by hybridization. | |||
| | journal = Science | volume = 301 | issue = 5637 | pages = 1211-6. | year =2003 }} </ref> and one out of ten species of birds are known to hybridize.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Grant, P.R., and Grant, B.R. | title = Hybridization in bird species | journal = Science | volume = 256 | issue = 4061 | pages = 193-7. | year =1992 }} </ref> There are also examples of hybridization in mammals and insects;<ref>{{cite journal | author = Gompert Z, Fordyce JA, Forister ML, Shapiro AM, Nice CC.| title = Homoploid hybrid speciation in an extreme habitat. | |||
| | journal = Science | volume = 314 | issue = 5807 | pages = 1923-5 | year =2006 }} </ref> however, this most often results in sterile offspring. | |||
| Horizontal gene transfer has been shown to result in the spread of ] across ]l populations.<ref>{{cite journal| last = Dzidic S, Bedekovic V.| title = Horizontal gene transfer-emerging multidrug resistance in hospital bacteria | journal = Acta pharmacologica Sinica| volume = 24| issue = 6 | pages = 519-526|date = 2003}}</ref> Furthermore, findings indicate that HGT has been a major mechanism for ] and ] evolution.<ref>{{cite journal| last = Andersson JO| title = Lateral gene transfer in eukaryotes | journal = Cellular and molecular life sciences| volume = 62| issue = 11 | pages = 1182-1197 | date = 2005}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal| last = Katz LA| title = Lateral gene transfers and the evolution of eukaryotes: theories and data | journal = International journal of systematic and evolutionary microbiology| volume = 52| issue = 5 | pages = 1893-1900 | date = 2002}}</ref> | |||
| Horizontal gene transfer complicates the inference of the ] of life, as the original metaphor of a tree of life no longer fits. Rather, since genetic information is passed to other organisms and other species in addition to being passed from parent to offspring, "biologists use the metaphor of a mosaic to describe the different histories combined in individual genomes and use metaphor of a net to visualize the rich exchange and cooperative effects of HGT among microbes".<ref> by Peter Gogarten, Ph.D.</ref> | |||
| ==Mechanisms of evolution== | |||
| ===Selection and adaptation=== | |||
| {{main|Natural selection|Adaptation}} | |||
| ]'s tail is the canonical example of ].]] | |||
| Natural selection comes from differences in survival and reproduction. Differential mortality is the survival rate of individuals to their reproductive age. Differential fertility is the total genetic contribution to the next generation. Note that, whereas mutations and genetic drift are ], natural selection is not, as it preferentially selects for different mutations based on differential fitnesses. For example, rolling dice is random, but always picking the higher number on two rolled dice is not random. The central role of natural selection in evolutionary theory has given rise to a strong connection between that field and the study of ]. | |||
| Natural selection can be subdivided into two categories: ] occurs when organisms that survive and reproduce increase the frequency of their genes in the gene pool over those that do not survive; and ] occurs when organisms which are more attractive to the opposite sex because of their features reproduce more and thus increase the frequency of those features in the gene pool. | |||
| Natural selection operates on mutations in a number of different ways. Arguably the most common form of selection is ], which decreases the frequency of harmful mutations; "]s" may be a result of this. Other forms of natural selection include ], which increases the frequency of a beneficial mutation, and ], the purposeful breeding of a species. | |||
| Through the process of natural selection, organisms become better adapted to their environments. ] is any evolutionary process that increases the ] of the individual, or sometimes the trait that confers increased fitness, e.g., a stronger prehensile tail or greater visual acuity. Note that adaptation is context-sensitive; a trait that increases fitness in one environment may decrease it in another. | |||
| Most biologists believe that adaptation occurs through the accumulation of many mutations of small effect. However, ] is an alternative process for adaptation that involves a single, very large-scale mutation. | |||
| ===Recombination=== | |||
| {{Main|Genetic recombination}} | |||
| In asexual organisms, variants in genes on the same chromosome will always be inherited together—they are ''linked'', by virtue of being on the same DNA molecule. However, ] organisms, in the production of gametes, shuffle linked alleles on homologous chromosomes inherited from the parents via ] ]. This shuffling allows independent ] of alleles (mutations) in genes to be propagated in the population independently. This allows bad mutations to be purged and beneficial mutations to be retained more efficiently than in asexual populations. | |||
| However, the meitoic recombination rate is not very high - on the order of one crossover (recombination event between homologous chromosomes) per chromosome arm per generation. Therefore, linked alleles are not perfectly shuffled away from each other, but tend to be inherited together. This tendency may be measured by comparing the co-occurrence of two alleles, usually quantified as ] (LD). A set of alleles that are often co-propagated is called a ]. Strong haplotype blocks can be a product of strong positive selection. | |||
| Recombination is mildly mutagenic, which is one of the proposed reasons why it occurs with limited frequency. Recombination also breaks up gene combinations that have been successful in previous generations, and hence should be opposed by selection. However, recombination could be favoured by negative frequency-dependent selection (this is when rare variants increase in frequency) because it leads to more individuals with new and rare gene combinations being produced. | |||
| When alleles cannot be separated by recombination (for example in mammalian ]s), there is an observable reduction in ], known as the ], and the successive establishment of bad mutations, known as ]. | |||
| ===Genetic drift=== | |||
| {{main|Genetic drift}} | |||
| Genetic drift is the change in allele frequency from one generation to the next as a result of the statistical effect of chance. The frequency of an allele in the offspring generation will vary according to a probability distribution of the frequency of the allele in the parent generation. Thus, over time even in the absence of selection upon the alleles, allele frequencies tend to "drift" upward or downward, eventually becoming "fixed" - that is, going to 0% or 100% frequency. Thus, fluctuations in allele frequency between successive generations may result in some alleles disappearing from the population due to chance alone. Two separate populations that begin with the same allele frequencies therefore might drift apart by random fluctuation into two divergent populations with different allele sets (for example, alleles present in one population could be absent in the other, or ''vice versa''). | |||
| ===Gene flow and population structure=== | |||
| {{main|Gene flow|Population genetics}} | |||
| ]s. Solid black lines indicate possible migration routes.]] | |||
| ], also called ''migration'', is the exchange of genetic variation between populations, when geography and culture are not obstacles. ] thought that gene flow is likely to be homogenising, and therefore counteracting selective adaptation. Obstacles to gene flow result in ], a necessary condition for ]. | |||
| The free movement of alleles through a population may also be impeded by population structure, the size and geographical distribution of a population. For example, most real-world populations are not actually fully interbreeding; geographic proximity has a strong influence on the movement of alleles within the population. Population structure has profound effects on possible mechanisms of evolution. | |||
| The effect of genetic drift depends strongly on the size of the population: drift is important in small mating populations, where chance fluctuations from generation to generation can be large. The relative importance of natural selection and genetic drift in determining the fate of new mutations also depends on the population size and the strength of selection. Natural selection is predominant in large populations, while genetic drift is in small populations. Finally, the time for an allele to become fixed in the population by genetic drift (that is, for all individuals in the population to carry that allele) depends on population size—smaller populations require a shorter time for fixation. | |||
| An example of the effect of population structure is the ], in which a population temporarily has very few individuals as a result of a migration or ], and therefore loses much genetic variation. In this case, a single, rare allele may suddenly increase very rapidly in frequency within a specific population if it happened to be prevalent in a small number of "founder" individuals. The frequency of the allele in the resulting population can be much higher than otherwise expected, especially for deleterious, disease-causing alleles. Since population size has a profound effect on the relative strengths of genetic drift and natural selection, changes in population size can alter the dynamics of these processes considerably. | |||
| ===Speciation and extinction=== | |||
| {{main|Speciation|Extinction}} | |||
| ]'' skeleton.]] | |||
| ] is the process by which new biological species arise. This may take place by various mechanisms. ] occurs in populations that become isolated geographically, such as by ] or migration.<ref>{{cite journal| author =Hoskin ''et al'' | year =Oct 2005| title = Reinforcement drives rapid allopatric speciation| journal =Nature | volume =437 | pages =1353-1356}}</ref> ] occurs when new species emerge in the same geographic area.<ref>{{cite journal| author =Savolainen ''et al'' | year =May 2006| title = Sympatric speciation in palms on an oceanic island| journal =Nature | volume =441 | pages =210-213}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal| author =Barluenga ''et al'' | year =February 2006| title = Sympatric speciation in Nicaraguan crater lake cichlid fish| journal =Nature | volume =439|pages =719-723}}</ref> ]'s ] is a type of speciation that exists in between the extremes of allopatry and sympatry. Peripatric speciation is a critical underpinning of the theory of ]. An example of rapid sympatric speciation can be clearly observed in the ], where new species of ''Brassica sp.'' have been made by the fusing of separate genomes from related plants. | |||
| ] is the disappearance of species (i.e., ]s). The moment of extinction is generally defined as occurring at the death of the last individual of that species. Extinction is not an unusual event on a ]—species regularly appear through speciation, and disappear through extinction. The ] was the Earth's most severe ], rendering extinct 90% of all marine species and 70% of all terrestrial vertebrate species. In the ], many forms of life perished (including approximately 50% of all ]), the most commonly mentioned among them being the non-avian ]s. The ] is a current mass extinction, involving the rapid extinction of tens or hundreds of thousands of species each year. Scientists consider human activities to be the primary cause of the ongoing extinction event, as well as the related influence of ].<ref>Leakey, Richard and Roger Lewin, 1996, ''The Sixth Extinction : Patterns of Life and the Future of Humankind'', Anchor, ISBN 0-385-46809-1.</ref> | |||
| ===Cooperation=== | |||
| Generally mathematical models incorporating mutation and natural selection have been used to model adaptation and evolution. Recent trends now incorporate "]" as more applicable to generating reliable models.<ref> ] et al. "Evolutionary dynamics of biological games"Science"'303'", 793-799 (2004), see also Nowak's book ''Evolutionary Dynamics''</ref> This work and others studies have focused attention on cooperation as a fundamental property needed for evolution to construct new levels of organization. Selfish replicators sacrificing their own reproductive potential to cooperate seems paradoxical in a competitive world. However a number of mechanisms have demonstrated the capacity to generate cooperation, and even ], such as kin selection, direct reciprocity, indirect reciprocity, network reciprocity, and group selection. The ubiquity of cooperation in the natural world and studies from the last twenty years reveal cooperation as a significant principle in constructive evolution.<ref> ] et al. ''Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation'' Science '''314''', 1560 (2006)</ref><ref>Sachs, J.L. ''Cooperation within and among species'' Journal of Evolutionary Biology '''19''', 1415 (2006)</ref> | |||
| ==Evidence of evolution== | |||
| {{main|Evidence of evolution}} | |||
| ]'' in context: one of many species that track the evolutionary development of fish fins into tetrapod limbs.]] | |||
| Evolution has left numerous signs of the histories of different species. ]s, along with the ] of present-day organisms, constitute the morphological, or ], record. By comparing the anatomies of both modern and extinct species, paleontologists can infer the lineages of those species. | |||
| The development of ], and particularly of DNA sequencing, has allowed biologists to study the record of evolution left in organisms' genetic structures. The degrees of similarity and difference in the DNA sequences of modern species allows geneticists to reconstruct their lineages. It is from DNA sequence comparisons that figures such as the 96% genotypic similarity between humans and chimpanzees are obtained.<ref>{{cite journal | author = Chimpanzee Sequencing and Analysis Consortium | year = 2005 | title = Initial sequence of the chimpanzee genome and comparison with the human genome|journal = ] | volume = 437 | pages = 69–87}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | author = Varki A, Altheide TK. | year = 2005 | title = Comparing the human and chimpanzee genomes: searching for needles in a haystack.| journal =Genome Res. | volume = 15(12) | pages = 1746-58}}</ref> | |||
| Other evidence used to demonstrate evolutionary lineages includes the geographical distribution of species. For instance, ] and most ]s are found only in Australia, showing that their common ancestor with placental mammals lived before the submerging of the ancient ] between Australia and Asia. | |||
| Scientists correlate all of the above evidence, drawn from ], anatomy, genetics, and geography, with other information about the ]. For instance, ] attests to periodic ]s during which the world's climate was much cooler, and these are often found to match up with the spread of species which are better-equipped to deal with the cold, such as the ]. | |||
| ===Morphological evidence=== | |||
| ], ] remnants of its terrestrial ancestors.]] | |||
| ]s are critical evidence for estimating when various lineages originated. Since fossilization of an organism is an uncommon occurrence, usually requiring hard parts (like teeth, bone, or pollen), the fossil record provides only sparse and intermittent information about ancestral lineages.<ref>{{cite journal| author =Schweitzer M.H. ''et al'' | year =2005| title = Soft-tissue vessels and cellular preservation in ''Tyrannosaurus rex''| journal =Science | volume =307 | issue =5717 | pages =1952-1955}}</ref> | |||
| The fossil record provides several types of data important to the study of evolution. First, the fossil record contains the earliest known examples of life itself, as well as the earliest occurrences of individual ]. For example, the first complex animals date from the ] period, approximately 520 million years ago. Second, the records of individual species yield information regarding the patterns and rates of evolution, showing whether, for example, speciation occurs gradually and incrementally, or in relatively brief intervals of geologic time. Thirdly, the fossil record is a document of large-scale patterns and events in the history of life. For example, ] frequently resulted in the loss of entire groups of species, while leaving others relatively unscathed. Recently, molecular biologists have used the time since divergence of related lineages to calibrate the rate at which mutations accumulate, and at which the ] of different lineages evolve. | |||
| ], the study of the ancestry of species, has revealed that structures with similar internal organization may perform divergent functions. ] limbs are a common example of such ] structures. The appendages on bat wings, for example, are very structurally similar to human hands, and may constitute a ]. Vestigial structures are idiosyncratic anatomical features such as the panda's "]", which indicate how an organism's evolutionary lineage constrains its adaptive development. Other examples of vestigial structures include the degenerate eyes of blind cave-dwelling fish, and the presence of hip bones in whales and snakes. Such structures may exist with little or no function in a more current organism, yet have a clear function in an ancestral species. Examples of vestigial structures in humans include ], the ] and the ]. | |||
| These anatomical similarities in extant and fossil organisms can give evidence of the relationships between different groups of organisms. Important fossil evidence includes the connection of distinct classes of organisms by so-called "]" species, such as the '']'', which provided early evidence for intermediate species between ]s and ]s,<ref>{{cite book | author = Feduccia, Alan | year = 1996 | title = The Origin and Evolution of Birds | publisher = Yale University Press | location = New Haven | id = ISBN 0-300-06460-8}}</ref> and the recently-discovered '']'', which clarifies the development from ] to ].<ref>{{cite journal | author = Daeschler, Edward B., Shubin, Neil H., & Jenkins Jr, Farish A. | year = 2006 | month = April | title = A Devonian tetrapod-like fish and the evolution of the tetrapod body plan|journal = ] | volume = 440 | pages = 757–763 | doi = 10.1038/nature04639 | url = http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7085/abs/nature04639.html | accessdate = 2006-07-14}}</ref> | |||
| ===Molecular evidence=== | |||
| By comparing the DNA sequences of species, we can discern their evolutionary relationships. The resultant ]s are typically congruent with traditional taxonomy, and are often used to either strengthen or correct taxonomic classifications. Sequence comparison is considered a measure robust enough to be used to correct erroneous assumptions in the phylogenetic tree in instances where other evidence is scarce. For example, neutral human DNA sequences are approximately 1.2% divergent (based on substitutions) from those of their nearest genetic relative, the ], 1.6% from ]s, and 6.6% from ]s.<ref>Two sources: 'Genomic divergences between humans and other hominoids and the effective population size of the common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees'. and 'Quantitative Estimates of Sequence Divergence for Comparative Analysis of Mammalian Genomes' " "</ref> Genetic sequence evidence thus allows inference and quantification of genetic relatedness between humans and other apes.<ref name="c">The picture labeled "Human Chromosome 2 and its analogs in the apes" in the article shows how humans have a single chromosome which is two separate chromosomes in the nonhuman apes.</ref><ref>The ] report '''', based on '''', states the ] is "providing the strongest evidence yet that humans are still evolving" and details some of that evidence.</ref> The sequence of the 16S ] gene, a vital gene encoding a part of the ], was used to find the broad phylogenetic relationships between all extant life. This analysis, originally done by ], resulted in the ], arguing for two major splits in the early evolution of life. The first split led to modern ], and the subsequent split led to modern ] and ]s. | |||
| Since ] processes do not leave fossils, research into the evolution of the basic cellular processes is done largely by comparison of existing organisms. Many lineages diverged when new metabolic processes appeared, and it is theoretically possible to determine when certain metabolic processes appeared by comparing the traits of the descendants of a common ancestor or by detecting their physical manifestations. As an example, the appearance of oxygen in the earth's atmosphere is linked to the evolution of ]. | |||
| The ] evidence also supports the universal ancestry of life. Vital ]s, such as the ], ], and ], are found in everything from the most primitive bacteria to the most complex mammals. The core part of the protein is conserved across all lineages of life, serving similar functions. Higher organisms have evolved additional ]s, largely affecting the regulation and ] of the core. Other overarching similarities between all lineages of extant organisms, such as ], ], ]s, and the ], give support to the theory of common descent. The ] of DNA, RNA, and amino acids is conserved across all known life. As there is no functional advantage to right- or left-handed molecular chirality, the simplest hypothesis is that the choice was made randomly by early organisms and passed on to all extant life through ]. Further evidence for reconstructing ancestral lineages comes from ] such as ]s, "dead" genes which steadily accumulate mutations.<ref>Pseudogene evolution and natural selection for a compact genome. ""</ref> | |||
| There is also a large body of molecular evidence for a number of different mechanisms for large evolutionary changes, among them: genome and ], which facilitates rapid evolution by providing substantial quantities of genetic material under weak or no selective constraints; ], the process of transferring genetic material to another cell that is not an organism's offspring, allowing for species to acquire beneficial genes from each other; ], capable of reassorting large numbers of different alleles and of establishing ]; and ], the incorporation of genetic material and biochemical composition of a separate species, a process observed in organisms such as the protist ] and used to explain the origin of ]s such as ] and ]s as the absorption of ancient ] cells into ancient eukaryotic ones.<ref>{{cite journal| author = Okamoto N, Inouye I. | year =2005| title = A secondary symbiosis in progress| journal =Science | volume =310 | issue =5746 | pages =287}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal| author = Okamoto N, Inouye I. | year =2006| title = Hatena arenicola gen. et sp. nov., a Katablepharid Undergoing Probable Plastid Acquisition.| journal =Protist |volume = Article in Print}}</ref> | |||
| ==Ancestry of organisms== | |||
| {{seealso|Common descent}} | |||
| ] family are evidence of common descent.]] | |||
| The theory of universal ] proposes that all organisms on Earth are descended from a common ancestor or ancestral gene pool. Evidence for common descent is inferred from traits shared between all living organisms. In Darwin's day, the evidence of shared traits was based solely on visible observation of morphologic similarities, such as the fact that all birds, even those which do not fly, have wings. Today, there is strong evidence from genetics that all organisms have a common ancestor. For example, every living cell makes use of ]s as its genetic material, and uses the same 20 ]s as the building blocks for ]s. The universality of these traits strongly suggests common ancestry, because the selection of many of these traits seems arbitrary.<ref>Oklahoma State - : "Sequence comparisons suggest recent horizontal transfer of many ]s among diverse ] including across the boundaries of ] 'domains'. Thus determining the phylogenetic history of a species cannot be done conclusively by determining evolutionary trees for single genes."</ref> | |||
| ===History of life=== | |||
| <!-- for future reference, heh, here's a ref to stromatolite debate that I took out because it messed up formatting - | |||
| "Ancient microfossils from Western Australia are again the subject of heated scientific argument: are they the oldest sign of life on Earth, or just a flaw in the rock?" "" --> | |||
| {{main|Timeline of evolution}} | |||
| ] ]s in the Siyeh Formation, ]. In 2002, William Schopf of ] published a controversial paper in the journal '']'' arguing that formations such as this possess 3.5 billion year old ]ized ]e microbes. If true, they would be the earliest known life on earth.]] | |||
| The ] from ] chemical reactions is not a part of biological evolution, but rather of pre-evolutionary ]. However, disputes over what defines ] make the point at which such increasingly complex sets of reactions became true organisms unclear. Not much is yet known about the earliest developments in life. There is no ] regarding the relationship of the three domains of organisms (], ], and ]) or regarding the precise reactions involved in abiogenesis. Attempts to shed light on the origin of life generally focus on the behavior of ]s—particularly ]—and the behavior of ]s. | |||
| Fossil evidence indicates that the diversity and complexity of modern life has developed over much of the ] ]. Oxygenic ] emerged around 3 billion years ago, and the subsequent emergence of an oxygen-rich atmosphere made the development of ] ] possible around 2 billion years ago. In the last billion years, simple multicellular plants and animals began to appear in the oceans. Soon after the emergence of the first animals, the ], a geologically brief period of remarkable biological diversity, originated all the major body plans, or ], of modern animals. This event is now believed to have been triggered by the development of the ]. | |||
| About 500 million years ago (]), ]s and ] colonized the land, and were soon followed by ]s and other animals. ]s first appeared around 300 mya, followed by ]s, then ]s around 200 mya and ]s around 100 mya. The ] arose around 2 mya, while the earliest modern humans lived 200 thousand years ago. | |||
| == Study of evolution == | |||
| {{main|Evolutionary biology}} | |||
| === History of modern evolutionary thought === | |||
| {{main|History of evolutionary thought}} | |||
| ]'s work on the ] of traits in pea plants (''pisum sativum'') laid the foundation for ], a field greatly associated with evolution.]] | |||
| ] at age 51, just after publishing '']''.]] | |||
| Although the idea of evolution has existed since classical antiquity, being first discussed by Greek philosophers such as ], the first convincing exposition of a mechanism by which evolutionary change could occur was not proposed until ] and ] jointly presented the theory of evolution by natural selection to the ] in ] in 1858. Shortly after, the publication of Darwin's '']'' popularized and provided detailed support for the theory. | |||
| However, Darwin had no working mechanism for inheritance. This was provided by ], whose research revealed that distinct traits were ] in a well-defined and predictable manner.<ref>{{cite book | last = Bowler | first = Peter J. | authorlink = Peter J. Bowler | year = 1989 | title = The Mendelian Revolution: The Emergence of Hereditarian Concepts in Modern Science and Society | publisher = Johns Hopkins University Press | location = Baltimore}}</ref> | |||
| In the 1930s, Darwinian natural selection and Mendelian inheritance were combined to form the ]. In the 1940s, the identification of ] as the genetic material by ] and colleagues, and the articulation of the double-helical structure of DNA by ] and ], provided a physical basis for the notion that genes were ] in DNA. Since then, the role of ] in evolutionary biology has become increasingly central.<ref>{{cite news | author = Rincon, Paul | url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4552466.stm | title = Evolution takes science honours | publisher = ] | date = 2005|accessdate = 2006-07-16}} According to the ], ], news editor of ], said "cientists tend to take for granted that evolution underpins modern biology Evolution is not just something that scientists study as an esoteric enterprise. It has very important implications for public health and for our understanding of who we are" and Dr. Mike Ritchie, of the school of biology at the University of St Andrews, UK said "The big recent development in evolutionary biology has obviously been the improved resolution in our understanding of genetics. Where people have found a gene they think is involved in speciation, I can now go and look how it has evolved in 12 different species of fly, because we've got the genomes of all these species available on the web."</ref> | |||
| ===Academic disciplines=== | |||
| {{main|Current research in evolutionary biology}} | |||
| Scholars in a number of academic disciplines continue to document examples of evolution, contributing to a deeper understanding of its underlying mechanisms. Every subdiscipline within ] both informs and is informed by knowledge of the details of evolution, such as in ], ], ], and ]. Areas of mathematics (such as ]), physics, chemistry, and other fields all make important contributions to current understanding of evolutionary mechanisms. Even disciplines as far removed as ] and ] play a part, since the process of biological evolution has coincided in time and space with the development of both the Earth and human civilization. | |||
| ] is a subdiscipline of biology concerned with the origin and descent of ], as well as their changes over time. It was originally an ] field including scientists from many traditional ]-oriented disciplines. For example, it generally includes scientists who may have a specialist training in particular organisms, such as ], ], or ], but who use those organisms to answer general questions in evolution. Evolutionary biology as an ] in its own right emerged as a result of the ] in the 1930s and 1940s. It was not until the 1970s and 1980s, however, that a significant number of universities had departments that specifically included the term ''evolutionary biology'' in their titles. | |||
| ] (informally, evo-devo) is a field of biology that compares the developmental processes of different animals in an attempt to determine the ancestral relationship between organisms and how developmental processes evolved. The discovery of ]s regulating development in model organisms allowed for comparisons to be made with genes and genetic networks of related organisms. | |||
| ] emerged in the late 19th century as the study of human ], and the fossilized skeletal remains of other ]s. At that time, anthropologists debated whether their evidence supported Darwin's claims, because skeletal remains revealed temporal and spatial variation among hominids, but Darwin had not offered an explanation of the specific mechanisms that produce variation. With the recognition of Mendelian genetics and the rise of the modern synthesis, however, evolution became both the fundamental conceptual framework for, and the object of study of, physical anthropologists. In addition to studying skeletal remains, they began to study genetic variation among human populations (]); thus, some physical anthropologists began calling themselves biological anthropologists. | |||
| The capability of evolution through selection to produce designs optimized for a particular environment has greatly interested mathematicians, scientists and engineers. There has been some recent success in implementing these ideas for artificial uses, including ]s, which can find the solution to a multi-dimensional problem more quickly than standard software produced by human intelligent designers, and the use of evolutionary ]s to optimize the design of a system<ref>, Dr David Buscher and Prof. Chris Haniff, 2003 -- optimizing the design of a large interferometer array using an evolutionary fitness landscape.</ref> Evolutionary optimization techniques are particularly useful in situations in which it is easy to determine the quality of a single solution, but hard to go through all possible solutions one by one. | |||
| ==Misunderstandings== | |||
| There are a number of common misunderstandings about evolution, some of which have hindered its general acceptance and form the basis of various ].<ref> "In a study of 1,200 college freshmen, Professor Alters found that 45% of those who doubted the theory of evolution had specific misunderstandings about some of the science that has been used to support it."</ref><ref>{{cite journal| author =Constance Holden| year =1998| title = SCIENCE EDUCATION: Academy Rallies Teachers on Evolution| journal =Science | volume =280 | issue =5361|pages =194}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal| author =Miller JD, Scott EC, Okamoto S.| year =2006| title = Science communication. Public acceptance of evolution.| journal =Science | volume =313 | issue =5788 | pages =765-766}}</ref> Critics of evolution frequently assert that evolution is "just a theory", a misunderstanding of the meaning of '']'' in a scientific context: whereas in colloquial speech a theory is a conjecture or guess, in science a theory is "a model of the universe, or a restricted part of it, and a set of rules that relate quantities in the model to observations that we make".<ref name=Hawking>] ''A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes'' New York: Bantam Books 1988. </ref> Critics also state that evolution is not a ], although from a scientific viewpoint evolution is considered ].<ref name=Isaak></ref><ref name=gouldfact>, reprinted in ''Speak Out Against The New Right'', Herbert F. Vetter (Editor), Beacon Press, 1982, ISBN 0807004863, Beacon Press, January 1982, ISBN 0807004871 and by Fenestra Books, October 31, 2004 ISBN 1587363577 and also in ''Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes'', Stephen Jay Gould, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, editions printed April 1983, November 28, 1984 and April 1994, pp. 253-262 ISBN 0393017168</ref><ref>"Evolution: Fact and Theory", Richard E. Lenski, American Institute of Biological Sciences, 2000.</ref> | |||
| Another common misunderstanding is the idea that one species, such as humans, can be more "highly evolved" or "advanced" than another. It is often assumed that evolution must lead to greater complexity, or that ] ("backwards" evolution) can occur. Scientists consider evolution a non-] process that does not proceed toward any ]; advancements are only situational, and organisms' complexity can either increase, decrease, or stay the same, depending on which is advantageous, and thus selected for.<ref></ref> | |||
| Evolution is also frequently misinterpreted as stating that humans evolved from monkeys; based on this, some critics argue that monkeys should no longer exist. This misunderstands speciation, which frequently involves a subset of a population ] splitting off before speciating, rather than an entire species simply turning into a new one. Additionally, biologists have never claimed that humans evolved from monkeys—only that humans and monkeys share a common ancestor, as do all organisms.<ref> edited by Mark Isaak. The TalkOrigins Archive, 2005</ref> | |||
| It is also frequently claimed that ] has only been inferred, never directly observed. In reality, the evolution of numerous new species has been observed.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html#part5|title=Observed Instances of Speciation|publisher=Talk Origins Archive|first=Joseph|last=Boxhorn}}</ref> A similar claim is that only ], not ], has been observed; however, macroevolution has been observed as well, and modern evolutionary synthesis draws little distinction between the two, considering macroevolution to simply be microevolution on a larger scale.<ref>Theobald, Douglas L. '29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent.' The Talk.Origins Archive. Vers. 2.83. 2004. 12 Jan, 2004 <http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/></ref> | |||
| ==Social and religious controversies== | |||
| {{main|Social effect of evolutionary theory|Creation-evolution controversy}} | |||
| ] as an ] reflects the cultural backlash against evolution and ].]] | |||
| Ever since the publication of ''The Origin of Species'' in 1859, evolution has been a source of nearly constant controversy. In general, controversy has centered on the philosophical, social, and religious implications of evolution, not on the science of evolution itself; the proposition that biological evolution occurs through the mechanism of natural selection is completely uncontested within the scientific community.<ref>An overview of the philosophical, religious, and cosmological controversies by a philosopher who strongly supports evolution is: ], '']'' (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995). On the scientific and social reception of evolution in the 19th and early 20th centuries, see: ], ''Evolution: The History of an Idea'', 3rd. rev. edn. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003).</ref> | |||
| As Darwin recognized early on, perhaps the most controversial aspect of evolutionary thought is ]. Specifically, many object to the idea that all diversity in life, including human beings, arose through ] processes without a need for supernatural intervention. Although many religions, such as ], have reconciled their beliefs with evolution through ], ] argue against evolution on the basis that it contradicts their theistic ]s.<ref></ref> In some countries—notably the ]—these tensions between scientific and religious teachings have fueled the ongoing ], a social and religious conflict especially centering on ]. While many other fields of science, such as ]<ref name="wmap">{{cite journal | doi=10.1086/377226 | title = First-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Determination of Cosmological Parameters | first = D. N. | last = Spergel | coauthors = et al. | journal = The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series | volume = 148 | year = 2003 | pages = 175—194}}</ref> and ]<ref name="zircon">{{cite journal | title = Evidence from detrital zircons for the existence of continental crust and oceans on the Earth 4.4 Gyr ago | first = S. A. | last = Wilde | coauthors = Valley J. W., Peck W. H. and Graham C. M. | journal = Nature | volume = 409 | year = 2001 | pages = 175—178}}</ref> also conflict with a literal interpretation of many religious texts, evolutionary biology has borne the brunt of these debates. Some also argue that evolutionary ] "degrades" human beings by placing them on the same level as other animals, in contrast with past views of a ] in which humans are "above" animals. | |||
| Evolution has been used to support philosophical and ethical choices which most contemporary scientists consider were neither mandated by evolution nor supported by science.<ref>] strongly disagreed with attempts by ] and other to extrapolate evolutionary ideas to all possible subject matters; see ] ''The Myths we Live By'' Routledge 2004 p62.</ref> For example, the ] ideas of ] were developed into arguments that the human gene pool should be improved by ] policies, including incentives for reproduction for those of "good stock" and disincentives, such as ], ], and later, ], ], and ], for those of "bad stock". Another example of an extension of evolutionary theory that is now widely regarded as unwarranted is "]", a term given to the 19th century ] ] theory developed by ] into ideas about "]" in commerce and human societies as a whole, and by others into claims that ], ], and ] were justified.<ref>On the history of eugenics and evolution, see ], ''In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity'' (New York: Knopf, 1985).</ref> | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| :''For a more comprehensive list of topics, see ] and ]'' | |||
| <p></p> | |||
| {| style="background-color: transparent; width: {{{width|100%}}}" | |||
| <p></p> | |||
| | width="33%" align="{{{align|left}}}" valign="{{{valign|top}}}" | | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| <p></p> | |||
| | width="33%" align="{{{align|left}}}" valign="{{{valign|top}}}" | | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| <p></p> | |||
| | width="33%" align="{{{align|left}}}" valign="{{{valign|top}}}" | | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| *] | |||
| <p></p> | |||
| |} | |||
| ==Footnotes== | |||
| {{reflist|2}} | |||
| ==References== | |||
| <!-- needs complete reference *Natalia S. Gavrilova & Leonid A. Gavrilov, 2002, --> | |||
| *] (2005)., ''Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Evo Devo and the Making of the Animal Kingdom'', W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 0-393-06016-0 | |||
| * {{cite book | author = Futuyma, D. |authorlink = Douglas J. Futuyma| year = 2005| title = Evolution| publisher = Sinauer Associates, Inc.| id = ISBN 0-87893-187-2}} | |||
| *Garcia-Fernàndez, Jordi. . Int J Biol Sci (May, 2006). | |||
| *Gigerenzer, Gerd, et al., ''The empire of chance: how probability changed science and everyday life'' (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989). | |||
| *Larson, Edward J. ''Evolution: The Remarkable History of a Scientific Theory'' (Modern Library Chronicles). Modern Library (May 4, 2004). ISBN 0-679-64288-9 | |||
| *Mayr, Ernst. ''What Evolution Is''. Basic Books (October, 2002). ISBN 0-465-04426-3 | |||
| *Menand, Louis. 2001 ''The Metaphysical Club''. New York: Farar, Straus and Giraux. ISBN 0-374-19963-9 | |||
| *Williams, G.C. (1966). Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of some Current Evolutionary Thought. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. | |||
| *Zimmer, Carl. ''Evolution: The Triumph of an Idea''. Perennial (October 1, 2002). ISBN 0-06-095850-2 | |||
| ==External links== | |||
| <!-- IMPORTANT! Please do not add any links before discussing them on the talk page. --> | |||
| {{Spoken Misplaced Pages|Evolution.ogg|2005-04-18}} <!-- updated changed sections 2005-04-18 --> | |||
| * from ] | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * , a wiki dedicated to education about evolution | |||
| * (provided by '']'') | |||
| * (provided by '']) | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * Deals heavily with the history of evolutionary thought | |||
| * | |||
| * The life and work of notable people who have contributed to evolutionary thought | |||
| * — see also ] | |||
| * Endorsed by Ann Druyan and the American Association for the Advancement of Science: introduces the top ten common myths and misunderstandings about evolution and includes a sample chapter, "Survival of the Fittest". | |||
| ;Evolution simulators | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| {{evolution}} | |||
| {{popgen}} | |||
| {{featured article}} | |||
| <!-- Categorization --> | |||
| <!-- Localization --> | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 21:47, 7 February 2007
Genesis 1 1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. 11And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. 12And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 13And the evening and the morning were the third day. 14And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. 20And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. 21And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 22And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. 23And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. 24And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. 25And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. 26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. 27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 28And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. 29And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. 30And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. 31And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Genesis 2 1Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. 4These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, 5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 7And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. 8And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. 10And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads. 11The name of the first is Pison: that is it which compasseth the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 12And the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. 13And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that compasseth the whole land of Ethiopia. 14And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goeth toward the east of Assyria. And the fourth river is Euphrates. 15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. 16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. 18And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. 19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. 20And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. 21And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. 25And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.