Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Sunday, April 20, 2008 | Reason : Evolution and Biology | print version Print | Comments

Document Lizards Undergo Rapid Evolution After Introduction To A New Home

by Science Daily

Thanks to SPS for the link.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080417112433.htm

Lizards Undergo Rapid Evolution After Introduction To A New Home

ScienceDaily (Apr. 18, 2008) — In 1971, biologists moved five adult pairs of Italian wall lizards from their home island of Pod Kopiste, in the South Adriatic Sea, to the neighboring island of Pod Mrcaru. Now, an international team of researchers has shown that introducing these small, green-backed lizards, Podarcis sicula, to a new environment caused them to undergo rapid and large-scale evolutionary changes.

"Striking differences in head size and shape, increased bite strength and the development of new structures in the lizard's digestive tracts were noted after only 36 years, which is an extremely short time scale," says Duncan Irschick, a professor of biology at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. "These physical changes have occurred side-by-side with dramatic changes in population density and social structure."

Researchers returned to the islands twice a year for three years, in the spring and summer of 2004, 2005 and 2006. Captured lizards were transported to a field laboratory and measured for snout-vent length, head dimensions and body mass. Tail clips taken for DNA analysis confirmed that the Pod Mrcaru lizards were genetically identical to the source population on Pod Kopiste.

Observed changes in head morphology were caused by adaptation to a different food source. According to Irschick, lizards on the barren island of Pod Kopiste were well-suited to catching mobile prey, feasting mainly on insects. Life on Pod Mrcaru, where they had never lived before, offered them an abundant supply of plant foods, including the leaves and stems from native shrubs. Analysis of the stomach contents of lizards on Pod Mrcaru showed that their diet included up to two-thirds plants, depending on the season, a large increase over the population of Pod Kopiste.

"As a result, individuals on Pod Mrcaru have heads that are longer, wider and taller than those on Pod Kopiste, which translates into a big increase in bite force," says Irschick. "Because plants are tough and fibrous, high bite forces allow the lizards to crop smaller pieces from plants, which can help them break down the indigestible cell walls."

Examination of the lizard's digestive tracts revealed something even more surprising. Eating more plants caused the development of new structures called cecal valves, designed to slow the passage of food by creating fermentation chambers in the gut, where microbes can break down the difficult to digest portion of plants. Cecal valves, which were found in hatchlings, juveniles and adults on Pod Mrcaru, have never been reported for this species, including the source population on Pod Kopiste.

"These structures actually occur in less than 1 percent of all known species of scaled reptiles," says Irschick. "Our data shows that evolution of novel structures can occur on extremely short time scales. Cecal valve evolution probably went hand-in-hand with a novel association between the lizards on Pod Mrcaru and microorganisms called nematodes that break down cellulose, which were found in their hindguts."

Change in diet also affected the population density and social structure of the Pod Mrcaru population. Because plants provide a larger and more predictable food supply, there were more lizards in a given area on Pod Mrcaru. Food was obtained through browsing rather than the active pursuit of prey, and the lizards had given up defending territories.

"What is unique about this finding is that rapid evolution can affect not only the structure and function of a species, but also influence behavioral ecology and natural history," says Irschick.

Results of the study were published March 25 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. This research was supported by the National Science Foundation and the Fund for Scientific Research in Flanders. Additional members of the research team include Anthony Herrel of Harvard University and the University of Antwerp, Kathleen Huyghe, Bieke Vanhooydonck, Thierry Backeljau and Raoul Van Damme of the University of Antwerp, Karin Breugelmans of the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences and Irena Grbac of the Croatian Natural History Museum.

Adapted from materials provided by University Of Massachusetts, Amherst.

Comments 1 - 22 of 22 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #164549 by RSP123 on April 20, 2008 at 12:03 pm

 avatarA nice example of the so-called Baldwin Effect, or "phenotypic plasticity" - in which the same genome can result in differing phenotypes, depending on the local environment. Any future genetic mutations that have an effect on cecal valves or bite strength or so on, will thus be selected for (or against) much more strongly than they would otherwise be.

Other Comments by RSP123

2. Comment #164551 by Adam Morrison on April 20, 2008 at 12:05 pm

 avatarFantastic! This is the kind of news I like to see on the site. I would like to know more about the cerval valves though. Were they completely new physical characteristics or was it a significant modification of existing sphincters or structures in the GI tract? Seems like the former in the article, but I'd like to know more.

Man, I love science.

Other Comments by Adam Morrison

3. Comment #164569 by alexmzk on April 20, 2008 at 12:19 pm

that's actually amazing.

Other Comments by alexmzk

4. Comment #164573 by F_A_F on April 20, 2008 at 12:23 pm

Agreed.....and to think they didn't teach this sort of thing in my classes at school, as the beattitudes were considered more relevant!

Other Comments by F_A_F

5. Comment #164596 by Greybishop on April 20, 2008 at 12:43 pm

 avatarWhen put alongside the ID nonsense, something like this almost makes me willing to say "go ahead and teach creationism" in schools. Even school children would be able to see how weak an idea it is compared to the actual evidence.

Obviously, I don't advocate teaching creationism in school, but when I see evidence like this that directly refutes the creationist notion that evolution has never been observed, I worry just a litte bit less about their already weak position.

Other Comments by Greybishop

6. Comment #164623 by Devolution on April 20, 2008 at 1:15 pm

 avatarI believe that makes it

Evilutionists: 5,432,673
Creationsits: 0

Other Comments by Devolution

7. Comment #164637 by clover on April 20, 2008 at 1:34 pm

 avataryou forget though: its still a lizard!
(or some other nonsense essentialist fallacy)

Other Comments by clover

8. Comment #164654 by Liveliest Crib on April 20, 2008 at 1:44 pm

7. Comment #164637 by clover on April 20, 2008 at 1:34 pm
you forget though: its still a lizard!
(or some other nonsense essentialist fallacy)
That's what I was thinking. Creationists and IDiots will just chalk this up as an example of "microevolution." The lizards didn't become an entirely different species.

And when you say that they would over time, they'll accuse you of simply having faith that they would over time, whereas they simply have faith that god wouldn't let that happen.

Other Comments by Liveliest Crib

9. Comment #164656 by clover on April 20, 2008 at 1:48 pm

 avatardon't worry, even if you managed to get a frog from a fish, they would attribute that to your agency and take it as proof that an intellengence must have guided evolution!

it seems that people who don't want to accept evolution simply won't regardless of the evidence.

Other Comments by clover

10. Comment #164667 by Clive on April 20, 2008 at 1:53 pm

 avatarDoes anyone know a mechanism that prevents speciation?

No? I'll keep asking anyway, I'm so often told it can't happen.

Other Comments by Clive

11. Comment #164716 by Raiko on April 20, 2008 at 3:26 pm

 avatar
Does anyone know a mechanism that prevents speciation?


No, so you may call it 'God'.

----

The 36 days really impressed me. I would just be worrying a little about conducting this experiment in regards of disrupting ecosystem on Pod Mrcaru - or that particular place there.

Other Comments by Raiko

12. Comment #164720 by Mark Smith on April 20, 2008 at 3:31 pm

Clive
Extinction
Lack of change in environment

Other Comments by Mark Smith

13. Comment #164721 by Konradius on April 20, 2008 at 3:33 pm

I know a mechanism that prevents speciation: make sure the population interbreeds well.
The special thing about ring species is that the populations on the ends of the ring are unable to interbreed. This causes them to speciate, even though (overlapping) populations along the ring remain able to interbreed.

Of course even with an interbreeding population, if you could somehow take an individual from x generations before, you would find they are unable to breed because the population as a whole has drifted.

(to be honest, I am a layman, but this is my understanding of the process)

Other Comments by Konradius

14. Comment #164724 by clintonjason on April 20, 2008 at 3:43 pm

 avatarguys...

Evangelical-talibans won't care... remember?
It's a D E L U S I O N !!!

It is NOT a matter of REASON...

It's a matter of COO-COO...

No matter what you deliver... their answer will always be:

WHATEVA MAN INNIT... MY JESUS IS BETTA THAN YOUR GOD DAWKINS, U NO WOH I MEEN?

:) :) :)

Other Comments by clintonjason

15. Comment #164742 by EvidenceOnly on April 20, 2008 at 4:34 pm

Hi "Devolution",

You would be right if Creationists put a theory and evidence forward that does not survive critical analysis but they don't.

This makes it 5,432,673 for evolutionists and -infinite for creationists.

Other Comments by EvidenceOnly

16. Comment #164750 by Christopher Davis on April 20, 2008 at 4:46 pm

"Does anyone know a mechanism that prevents speciation?"---Raiko, comment #11

Konraduis beat me to this, but yeah if the two groups were reintegrated then speciation most likely would not occur. What would be interesting though, is would cecal valves remain in a portion of the population (assuming the two groups were reintegrated in their original habitat)?

Of course several of the posters here are correct, IDers will just scoff and say "microevolution". Regardless, I could easily use this information and a dry-erase board to make anyone capable of rational thought understand why the "gaps in the fossil record argument" doesn't hold water.

Other Comments by Christopher Davis

17. Comment #164783 by Mitchell Gilks on April 20, 2008 at 5:16 pm

 avatarHeh. This proves nothing!! This is merely an example of microevolution, not macroevolution!! So there you big dumb dumbs.

Goddidit! Q-fucking-E-fucking-D. Son.

Seriously though, I am most interested in the change in behaviour so rapidly. From being territorial to being lazy, and aloof. "I should go chase that other lizard away from my shrubbery, but, meh."

Other Comments by Mitchell Gilks

18. Comment #164869 by aquilacane on April 20, 2008 at 7:08 pm

 avatarWas the capacity to develop Cecal valves brought about by the introduction of a slowly growing nematode population in the hindguts, or something else? Just want to know the full nature of the relationship.

Other Comments by aquilacane

19. Comment #164977 by rod-the-farmer on April 20, 2008 at 10:50 pm

 avatarGood story. I bet the ID types will say "But you didn't observe this happening, you didn't watch each lizard every hour of the day, did you !"

Ah well. No mention of how many generations it took.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

20. Comment #165067 by strengthofmind on April 21, 2008 at 2:38 am

I think you give ID proponents too much credit. From a quick glance at fstdt you can spot gems like "I won't beleive in evolution until I see one species give birth to another, like a dog giving birth to a fish" or "If science disagrees with the Bible, then science is wrong". In Europe we can let them wallow in their own ignorance. I've got a lot of sympathy for America where the education system is being hijacked.

Other Comments by strengthofmind

21. Comment #165467 by babrock on April 21, 2008 at 1:50 pm

As I understand it, t only difference btwn micro and macro evolution is time and a matter of degree.

I am also rather confident tho, that as a creationist will understand it, this is merely an example of micro and not macro evolution.

W/ their ability to compartmentalize and obfiscate, I think expecting this to change creationists minds is expecting too much.

And now that I have rechecked, I see that livelycrib, among others, has already come to this same conclusion. So hell, I must be right now.

As Sam says tho "all we have are converstions"
W/ facts,evidence and converstion, there is at least always hope.

Other Comments by babrock

22. Comment #165681 by serendipitydawg on April 22, 2008 at 3:27 am

Re: 6. Comment #164623 by Devolution
I believe that makes it

Evilutionists: 5,432,673
Creationsits: 0

"Evil"!

Other Comments by serendipitydawg
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: