Why did fish move onto land?

[Beaker]

One of the big debates in evolution is why did fish move from the sea onto land? What possible reason could they have had to leave the safety of the seas? A new study of Blennies in the Cook Islands is showing a reason why they may come ashore....shedding light on the age old question:

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/fish-found-leaving-sea-evolve-land-animals

[GMDino]

(03-18-2017, 02:23 PM)Beaker Wrote: One of the big debates in evolution is why did fish move from the sea onto land? What possible reason could they have had to leave the safety of the seas? A new study of Blennies in the Cook Islands is showing a reason why they may come ashore....shedding light on the age old question:

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/fish-found-leaving-sea-evolve-land-animals

Pffft.  "Study".

Fish never moved on to land.  God put them in the water so they knew to stay there!

[Bengalzona]

(03-18-2017, 02:23 PM)Beaker Wrote: One of the big debates in evolution is why did fish move from the sea onto land? What possible reason could they have had to leave the safety of the seas?

To get to the "other side"?



Good article, though.

[xxlt]

(03-18-2017, 02:23 PM)Beaker Wrote: One of the big debates in evolution is why did fish move from the sea onto land? What possible reason could they have had to leave the safety of the seas? A new study of Blennies in the Cook Islands is showing a reason why they may come ashore....shedding light on the age old question:

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/fish-found-leaving-sea-evolve-land-animals

Three most important words in the article: small moist crevices. They can be tremendous motivators. Throw in a slightly fishy smell and the rest is evolutionary history.

[*wildcats forever*]

(03-18-2017, 03:15 PM)xxlt Wrote: Three most important words in the article: small moist crevices. They can be tremendous motivators. Throw in a slightly fishy smell and the rest is evolutionary history.

My apologies to the OP for the following:

Sometimes you have roll 'em in flour to find those crevices..... 

Hopefully (for the Blennies' sake) they taste awful, since the land predator known as 'man' loves a good fish dinner, especially this time of year.

[Beaker]

(03-18-2017, 03:15 PM)xxlt Wrote: Three most important words in the article: small moist crevices. They can be tremendous motivators. Throw in a slightly fishy smell and the rest is evolutionary history.

Well done....although I can see this post completely derailing the thread...lol.

[*wildcats forever*]

(03-18-2017, 04:06 PM)Beaker Wrote: Well done....although I can see this post completely derailing the thread...lol.

.... and my apologies for further derailment. But honestly, how could I resist? 

[Rotobeast]

I was thinking it had to do with keeping eggs away from predators.
I thought depositing them in the "moist crevices" would afford a higher rate of survivability, providing the deposit point was close enough to the high tide to return.



But anyway.....

[Vas Deferens]

So they could make it to Noah's ark.

[Yojimbo]

(03-18-2017, 02:23 PM)Beaker Wrote: One of the big debates in evolution is why did fish move from the sea onto land? What possible reason could they have had to leave the safety of the seas? A new study of Blennies in the Cook Islands is showing a reason why they may come ashore....shedding light on the age old question:

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/stories/fish-found-leaving-sea-evolve-land-animals

So survival was a driving factor? I'm shocked 

[Bengalzona]

(03-18-2017, 10:16 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: So they could make it to Noah's ark.

I was going to ask why this thread is in P&R.... but now I know.

[treee]

(03-19-2017, 02:30 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: I was going to ask why this thread is in P&R.... but now I know.

Where else are we gonna talk about science? Maybe they should rename it to S&P&R.

[Beaker]

The fact that predators are the selection pressure in this example helps explain why. The big statement anti-evolution people used to make was "Why would fish move onto land when they have evrything they need in the water?" Well, now you know there are other factors involved besides finding food.

[GMDino]

(03-19-2017, 06:49 PM)Beaker Wrote: The fact that predators are the selection pressure in this example helps explain why. The big statement anti-evolution people used to make was "Why would fish move onto land when they have evrything they need in the water?" Well, now you know there are other factors involved besides finding food.

They know that...they just don't believe it.

[6andcounting]

I always wondered why we really don't see any type of fish evolving to live on land in the present day. It never made sense that the same evolution that happened previously wasn't still going on today.

[Belsnickel]

(03-19-2017, 06:49 PM)Beaker Wrote: The fact that predators are the selection pressure in this example helps explain why. The big statement anti-evolution people used to make was "Why would fish move onto land when they have evrything they need in the water?" Well, now you know there are other factors involved besides finding food.

I know that for some people predation seems like an obvious answer for some of these things, and it makes sense logically. I'm sure several of us are reading this and going "well, yeah..." But the important thing this study does is provide evidence to confirm the hypothesis. There are many ways to test evolution and we have seen them over the years, but this process provides a unique perspective not just for the sea to land transition, but the overall implications of what this can mean are huge.

And I know you know this, but I just happened to quote you to say this.

[Belsnickel]

(03-19-2017, 07:07 PM)6andcounting Wrote: I always wondered why we really don't see any type of fish evolving to live on land in the present day. It never made sense that the same evolution that happened previously wasn't still going on today.

It likely does, it's just often happening on levels and in places where we aren't seeing it. And since it takes generations upon generations to evolve like that, it can be difficult to track. This is why this study can be a very unique opportunity. But one reason why, if predation were the primary driver for the initial transition, that we aren't seeing it much is because it isn't safe on land for everything, anymore. They mention that this island provides that sanctuary, but when the transition first occurred there were no land predators, because there were no creatures on the land. The predators, though, evolved to follow their prey, and so other evolutionary developments had to occur.

[6andcounting]

(03-19-2017, 07:16 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: It likely does, it's just often happening on levels and in places where we aren't seeing it. And since it takes generations upon generations to evolve like that, it can be difficult to track. This is why this study can be a very unique opportunity. But one reason why, if predation were the primary driver for the initial transition, that we aren't seeing it much is because it isn't safe on land for everything, anymore. They mention that this island provides that sanctuary, but when the transition first occurred there were no land predators, because there were no creatures on the land. The predators, though, evolved to follow their prey, and so other evolutionary developments had to occur.

Obviously it's not something that will happen in a matter of a 20 year case study. Realistically, every living organism is undergoing evolution; it's just not change we recognize as such. Deer are currently evolving to withstand vehicular impact, unfortunately for them it's at a slower rate than the speed of a sedan. 

[xxlt]

(03-19-2017, 02:35 PM)treee Wrote: Where else are we gonna talk about science? Maybe they should rename it to S&P&R.

We get into economics a little too. So, how about S&M and P&R?

[xxlt]

(03-19-2017, 07:07 PM)6andcounting Wrote: I always wondered why we really don't see any type of fish evolving to live on land in the present day. It never made sense that the same evolution that happened previously wasn't still going on today.

Duh! Obama!