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)
Saturday, August 30, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version Print | Comments

Document Prickly fish add genetic heft to Darwin's theory on its 150th anniversary

by The Canadian Press

Thanks to Gary Walsh for the link.

http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5jk7NroPT5vM7s8QixiOryXqKm_xQ

Prickly fish add genetic heft to Darwin's theory on its 150th anniversary

VANCOUVER — A tiny, prickly fish is helping B.C. researchers understand how organisms evolve in response to new or changing environments.

Scientists say that's a key factor in forecasting how different species might deal with climate change and other human-imposed environmental conditions.

The difference between freshwater and marine stickleback, a minnow-sized fish found in lakes, rivers, streams and oceans across Canada, is the focus of a University of British Columbia study that adds genetic proof to evolutionary theory.

Rowan Barrett, a PhD student at UBC's Zoology department, is part of a team that transferred marine stickleback from a salt-water lagoon to freshwater ponds at the university, and then studied the subsequent changes.

The results were surprising.

"Being able to quantify the speed with which populations are able to adapt to these sort of selection pressures is essential for formulating comprehensive policy about climate change," said Barrett, co-author of the study published Thursday in Science Express.

Stickleback originated in the ocean but made their way into freshwater bodies of water after the last Ice Age about 20,000 years ago.

Since then, the freshwater fish have lost the marine fish's characteristic bony armour on their sides.

True to Darwin's theory that favourable traits passed from parent-to-offspring become more common in successive generations, scientists say changes in these fish have occurred independently across Canada.

Barrett said researchers recently pinpointed the gene that's responsible for the change in the armour.

There's a mutation in the genes, otherwise known as an allele, that's rare in ocean stickleback, but common in the freshwater variety, he said.

To figure out what advantage the mutation may have in freshwater, Barrett and a research partner sorted through over 35,000 marine stickleback pulled from a B.C. lagoon in 2006 and transported the less-spindly ones - about one in 100 - to ponds at UBC.

Then they waited for the fish to breed by the thousands in order to track how often the mutation occurs in the offspring.

It didn't take long before researchers had what they needed.

"That's the great thing about stickleback. They don't require much prodding to produce a lot of offspring," Barrett said.

The researchers found that fish carrying the mutated version of the gene, which reduces armour, also grew faster. That made them more likely to survive the winter and breed earlier to produce offspring with the gene.

While Darwin's theory of natural selection, which supposes that all species evolved from common ancestors over time is nothing new, Barrett said the prickly fish study adds a genetic understanding to that work.

"These ideas about natural selection and how that affects evolution have been around all the way back to Darwin 150 years ago, but what he didn't have was any knowledge of genetics," Barrett said.

"We're only now getting to the stage that we can pinpoint the genes that are responsible for morphological traits that help a species survive and deal with changing environments."

Barrett said the study will lead the way for researchers to look at the genes responsible for species adaptation and how they deal with a new environment.

It's also a start in determining how many years it may take different species to adapt to climate or environmental changes caused by human development, he said.

"We really need to actually put numbers on these things," he said.

"If we exceed those thresholds the species is going to be in trouble, and it'll go extinct."

This week marks the 150th anniversary of Darwin's first publication of his natural selection theory, a milestone not lost on Barrett.

"It's fantastic. It's really nice to be following in his footsteps and hopefully contributing something new and useful to his ideas."

Comments 1 - 8 of 8 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #239844 by Stafford Gordon on August 30, 2008 at 12:23 pm

Sadly, evidence seems not to be of any value to believers.

Other Comments by Stafford Gordon

2. Comment #239944 by Matt7895 on August 30, 2008 at 3:27 pm

 avatarRemember kids, repeat after me, say it whenever you meet an evolutionist!

"There are no transitional fossils. There are no transitional fossils. There are no transitional fossils. There are no transitional....."

Other Comments by Matt7895

3. Comment #239973 by Dr Technical on August 30, 2008 at 4:45 pm

Religionists seem to be proud of the fact that it's OK to ignore evidence. What annoys me is that they don't even try to understand, and wallow in glorious smug ignorance.

It is indeed a biological enigma.

Other Comments by Dr Technical

4. Comment #240131 by sppach on August 31, 2008 at 12:19 am

Another nail in the coffin, keep them coming

Other Comments by sppach

5. Comment #240225 by Darwin's Teapot on August 31, 2008 at 5:33 am

 avatarI wonder what McCain's new VP candidate, Palin, thinks of this? Wonder if she would allow this to get taught alongside creationism in public schools? What am I thinking? Of course she wouldn't. This "evidence" is nothing more than a liberal conspiracy and a misunderstanding of god's divine signature.

www.darwinsteapot.blogspot.com

Other Comments by Darwin's Teapot

6. Comment #240272 by T4Baxter on August 31, 2008 at 8:16 am

 avatarIt seems like we've struck another passive blow in a one sided war on error. It won't be long before the underdogs of faith turn aggressive and prove themselves unworthy of the respect they demand. not long now :)

Other Comments by T4Baxter

7. Comment #240276 by Roger Stanyard on August 31, 2008 at 8:40 am

 avatarDt technical "Religionists seem to be proud of the fact that it's OK to ignore evidence."

Seem? Some of them do! Kurt Wise has openly bragged that if all the evidence proved absolutely conclusively that the theory of evoution by natural slection is right, he still wouldn't believe it.

The creationists are not interested any any evidence that contradicts them.

They are only interested in any evidence that does not contradict their religious opinions. All the rest has to be censored, ignored or rubbished. It is exactly the way Stalin and Hitler worked.

Other Comments by Roger Stanyard

8. Comment #240312 by bluebird on August 31, 2008 at 10:30 am

 avatarBiologists are studying the banded/grotto sculpin--cottus carolinae-- as it adapts to cave life. A nice 10 minute segment aired recently:


http://mdc4.mdc.mo.gov/tv/video.asp?mediaID=ae253680c9fb1dbb661175692b51cc07

Other Comments by bluebird
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: