RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (13) < 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... >   
  Topic: Coloration of animals, mimicry, aposematism, Is really natural selection behind it?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 03 2007,15:03   





--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 03 2007,15:14   

you tell me what is what above.  

when ant mimicking spiders mimic ant behavior (including stroking them with their fore legs, which look to us like antennae) i think it is a safe call.

your point 2 is spurious for several reasons.  current survival advantage says nothing about past survival advantage.  

further there are many difficulties associated with measuring the selection costs directly.  many of them logistic.  some theoretical (what to measure).  

see Bumpus 1899 for a good example of how it might be done cheaply and simply.  Or don't.

point 3 is stupid in the same way.  You'd have to know the genetic basis of mimicry, and no one knows that yet.  Or you'd have to measure selection during the time which the mimicry character became fixed.  

So, it still stands that you define mimicry out of the picture with your 3 points.  Under your definition, it can't be mimicry because it can't be mimicry.  

All Science So Far!!!

still waiting for your explanation, suckah.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 03 2007,15:51   

You need to re-host those images, the first 2 aren't working.

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 03 2007,16:07   

I can see them.

Wanna bet that Martin acts like he can't?

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 03 2007,16:09   

Quote (improvius @ Oct. 03 2007,15:51)
You need to re-host those images, the first 2 aren't working.

Same here.

  
BWE



Posts: 1896
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 03 2007,17:12   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 02 2007,17:36)
Quote
Because: to look like an ant, wasp or ladybird brings no "survival advantage".


Oh really, Marty? You quite sure about that? Or is your arrogance supposed to prove it?

 
Quote
natural selection play no role in evolution of "warning coloration" - aposematism and NS play no role in mimicry. I


Then what does 'play a role', Marty?

Arden, that's what makes it a joke right there. First, yes it does demonstrate natural selection :: witness my octopi :: second whether it does or doesn't; WTF is the point?

V, what are you getting at? Whhat is your alternative? Do you think that mimicry is evidence for front loading?

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
Henry J



Posts: 4098
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 03 2007,22:27   

One question is what would prevent variance + natural selection from occasionally producing cases of mimicry, when lots of species (many of them with lots of varieties) are thrown together in one ecosystem

Henry

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,11:16   

Erasmus.

We are here not at school where you can deceive children with ants' mimics and stories how natural selection caused their existence using your weird pictures.

First you should putname of the species of the beetle (you have sent also beetles, not spiders you know) next to the every picture you have sent. As you might noticed I have done it every time I sent a picture.

Second you should sent also a picture and species name of anant you suppose the beetle is mimicking. Otherwise we can send photos ad nausea.
Your example is valid only until a real picture of an ant is present for comparision.

(I am afraid ants do not sit on a ladder observing their mimics from above as darwinists do. I would say more appropriate view would be a side view. Just a hint.)


You sent:



and this is a real ant:




You sent


and this is a real ant



I doubt that real ants using their antennae could be mislead. I doubt that their touch would give them impression of the own species. In the second example your beetle is missing entirely the narrow connection between thorax and abdomen.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,11:25   

Quote (VMartin @ Oct. 05 2007,12:16)
I doubt that real ants using their antennae could be mislead. I doubt that their touch would give them impression of the own species.

Hypothetically, what would convince you otherwise?

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,11:29   

Jeannot,

the same for you. Be more precise as "flies painted with striped color". There are much more striking similarities between some species of Syrphidae and wasps than there are between ants and their "mimics". But of course let me know which yellow-black striped hoverflies do you consider to be wasps mimics and which not. There are 6.000 species of Syrphidae.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,12:14   

Quote
We are here not at school where you can deceive children with ants' mimics and stories how natural selection caused their existence using your weird pictures.


What DID cause their existence, Marty?

Any idea?

Any idea at all?

Clueless?

Come on, don't be a troll, answer the question.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,12:36   

Quote (VMartin @ Oct. 05 2007,11:29)
Jeannot,

the same for you. Be more precise as "flies painted with striped color". There are much more striking similarities between some species of Syrphidae and wasps than there are between ants and their "mimics". But of course let me know which yellow-black striped hoverflies do you consider to be wasps mimics and which not. There are 6.000 species of Syrphidae.

I'm not an entomologist but a population geneticist (sort of). Do you have access to the paper? I guess it will answer your questions.
But to me, they are hardly relevant anyway. The test and the control (painted in black) show that yellow stripes reduce predation on tested species, all else being equal. Maybe they used several species.
Their result is compatible with the hypothesis that yellow stripes are aposematic and that mimicry can be advantageous.
Perhaps it's not the best explanation. But at least it's an attempt.
What's your hypothesis, Martin?

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,13:48   

Jeannot.

On my knowledge birds eat wasps readily. But even if we accept preliminary the unplatability of wasps (I doubt about it very) there was done a research (Dlussky 1984 - is it "outdated"? ) that shows that:

 
Quote

On the other hand, all the syrphids were considered to be palatable, and even the superb wasp mimic Temnostoma vespiforme was eaten by Spotted Flycatchers despite the fact that its model was rejected. Dlusski concluded that these experienced birds usually distinguished between models and mimics, even the good ones, and thus mimicry was ineffective here.


Temnostoma vespiforme :


------------
The evolution of imperfect mimicry in hoverflies by
Francis Gilbert
eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/archive/00000096/01/ImperfectMimicry.pdf

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,14:12   

Deaf today, Marty? Sorry to hear it. I'll ask again.

 
Quote
We are here not at school where you can deceive children with ants' mimics and stories how natural selection caused their existence using your weird pictures.


What DID cause their existence, Marty?

I mean, since you don't want us to 'deceive children', how will we know what to say unless you tell us?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
BWE



Posts: 1896
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,14:19   

Ms. Martin,

What the flying heck are you yammering on about? Do you have the notion that this is refuting something? I remember hearing conversations like this in my youth between my Mom and her entomologist friends. But, as far as I can tell, they were quibbling over details; there was no big point.

Do you have a big point? I mean seriously, there are mimics. For some godamm reason there are mimics. They obviously evolved that way so there must have been some advantage. Go figure out what that advantage was! Or whatever.

I just don't get what you are trying to accomplish.

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,14:23   

Quote (VMartin @ Oct. 05 2007,14:48)
Jeannot.

On my knowledge birds eat wasps readily. But even if we accept preliminary the unplatability of wasps (I doubt about it very) there was done a research (Dlussky 1984 - is it "outdated"? ) that shows that:

 
Quote

On the other hand, all the syrphids were considered to be palatable, and even the superb wasp mimic Temnostoma vespiforme was eaten by Spotted Flycatchers despite the fact that its model was rejected. Dlusski concluded that these experienced birds usually distinguished between models and mimics, even the good ones, and thus mimicry was ineffective here.

So, can we all just agree that you can't fool all of the predators all of the time?

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,15:10   

BWE
 
Quote

But, as far as I can tell, they were quibbling over details; there was no big point.


Details are important. You cannot conceive a theory when all details contradict it - unless you are a darwinist.

 
Quote

I mean seriously, there are mimics. For some godamm reason there are mimics.


I am afraid those "mimics" exists only in your head. Predators do not care about your "mimics". Discuss real facts, not armchair presupposition about "mimicry". I am ready to discuss "mimicry" of ants, ladybirds, wasps, butteflies. Use facts, not darwinian "theories". Go on.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,15:19   

Still deaf, Marty? Surely Bratislava must have ear doctors, even tho their level of science education seems iffy. I'll ask again, third time:

Quote
We are here not at school where you can deceive children with ants' mimics and stories how natural selection caused their existence using your weird pictures.


What DID cause their existence, Marty?

Don't you want us to stop 'deceiving children'?

Go on.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Steviepinhead



Posts: 532
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,16:30   

Vshortedontestosterone:

I'm somewhat reluctant to invoke the spirit of Hollywood horse opera stars, living and dead. Maybe they've never shown John Wayne or Clint Eastwood movies in the the dim smokey movie halls of Northeast Lower Bratislava.

But, seriously dude, I think even Marlene Dietrich would agree: you need to cowboy up!

Choice (a): Explain to us in your best poor English, if natural selection didn't drive the evolution of the mimics, what else did.

Choice (b): Admit you haven't a frickin' clue what gave rise to mimics, wouldn't recognize said clue if it was ten miles wide and fell on you from space 65 mya while you were vacationing in Cancun, and that, as a consequence, you are just a peculiarly-obsessed poseur.

Choice ©: Continue to neither explain or admit, in which case everybody else commenting here, and everybody else who might ever come to read this thread, will realize that you can't do (a) because you're (b).

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,16:37   

I think he's going with:

(d) There are no mimics.

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Henry J



Posts: 4098
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,17:03   

Whether a wasp is palatable or not might depend on the kind of bird trying to eat it. Just a thought.

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,21:31   

Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 05 2007,17:03)
Whether a wasp is palatable or not might depend on the kind of bird trying to eat it. Just a thought.

Palatability or unpalatability of an insect should not be generalised by our human perception. It is very often pure antropomorphism.

Birds, or better insectivores in common have different criteria.

Field-based research that put under scrutiny contents of stomachs of many different bird species:

-Csiki Hungary 1905-1910 investigated contents of 2.800 birds.

- In Biological Survey Division of United States Department of Agriculture had been investigated according Heikertinger almost 80.000(!) contents of birds stomachs before 2WW.

Such researches are of course brutal, but represent reality much more better than any research done with birds in cages.

Both researches showed up that wasps are readily eaten by birds. McAtee from the mentioned department of Agriculture - who was a prominent ornitologist - came to the conclusion, that warning coloration of wasps are ineffective. He disputed many years with famous selectionist Poulton about it.

But nowadays are results of these researches forgotten because they do not fit into selectionist agenda.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,22:05   

Hey, Marty, what do YOU think causes mimicry?

Or do you think it doesn't exist?

Answer, troll.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 8994
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,22:12   

Quote (improvius @ Oct. 03 2007,16:51)
You need to re-host those images, the first 2 aren't working.

improvius, that AFDave sig is really devastating. It's somewhere in the Top 10 of Bad Creationist Reasoning ever given at AtBC.

   
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,23:02   

Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 05 2007,23:12)
Quote (improvius @ Oct. 03 2007,16:51)
You need to re-host those images, the first 2 aren't working.

improvius, that AFDave sig is really devastating. It's somewhere in the Top 10 of Bad Creationist Reasoning ever given at AtBC.

Yeah, it was definitely my favorite.  The best part is that, as far as I can tell, he meant it exactly the way it sounds.  He's never once complained that it's out of context or tried to back down from it.

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,23:11   

Quote (improvius @ Oct. 05 2007,23:02)
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 05 2007,23:12)
 
Quote (improvius @ Oct. 03 2007,16:51)
You need to re-host those images, the first 2 aren't working.

improvius, that AFDave sig is really devastating. It's somewhere in the Top 10 of Bad Creationist Reasoning ever given at AtBC.

Yeah, it was definitely my favorite. The best part is that, as far as I can tell, he meant it exactly the way it sounds. He's never once complained that it's out of context or tried to back down from it.

Quote
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.


So... I guess it means that one of these days, AFD's loving God will take all the scientists who still don't believe in Creationism and have us all gassed and burned? Or just taken to a forest outside of town, shot, and buried in a mass grave? I'm confused...

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Henry J



Posts: 4098
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 05 2007,23:37   

Quote

Quote
(Henry J @ Oct. 05 2007,17:03)
Whether a wasp is palatable or not might depend on the kind of bird trying to eat it. Just a thought.


Palatability or unpalatability of an insect should not be generalised by our human perception. It is very often pure antropomorphism.


How the heck do you get "human perception" out of "depend on kind of bird"?

Henry

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 06 2007,01:01   

Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 05 2007,23:37)
 
Quote

Quote
(Henry J @ Oct. 05 2007,17:03)
Whether a wasp is palatable or not might depend on the kind of bird trying to eat it. Just a thought.


Palatability or unpalatability of an insect should not be generalised by our human perception. It is very often pure antropomorphism.


How the heck do you get "human perception" out of "depend on kind of bird"?

Henry

I have given you information about scientific research that solve the problem of the so called unpalatability of wasps.

But if you prefer only philosophizing that some birds eat wasps and some don't then feel free to continue in this best tradition of armchair darwininism.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 06 2007,10:38   

Quote
I have given you information about scientific research that solve the problem of the so called unpalatability of wasps.


What IS the solution, dipshit?

What is the explanation for mimicry?

Do you need to ask Davison first?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 06 2007,10:59   

As somewhat of an aside, I was looking through some research on the topic and found this fascinating (to me, anyway) paper:

Conditional use of honest signaling by a Batesian mimic

Apparently, there are times when being an ant mimic isn't such a hot idea - like when there's an ant predator nearby. So the mimic spiders avoid "accidental" predation by temporarily signaling. "Dude, I'm totally not really an ant!"

Quote
Jumping spiders (Salticidae) usually avoid ants, but some species within this family single out ants as preferred prey, while others (especially the species in the genus Myrmarachne) are Batesian mimics of ants. Field records show that ant-eating salticids sometimes prey on Myrmarachne, suggesting that the unwanted attention of predators that specialize on the model may be an important, but poorly understood, cost of Batesian mimicry. By staging encounters in the laboratory between living ant-eating salticids and Myrmarachne, we determined that ant-eating salticids attack Myrmarachne. However, when Myrmarachne detects a stalking ant-eating salticid early enough, it adopts a distinctive display posture (legs almost fully extended, elevated 45, and held out to the side 45), and this usually deters the predator. When Myrmarachne detects an ant-eating salticid before stalking begins, Myrmarachne makes preemptive displays that appear to inhibit the initiation of stalking. Using immobile lures made from dead Myrmarachne that were either in a display posture or a nondisplay posture, we ascertained that specifically the display posture of Myrmarachne deters the initiation of stalking (ant-eating salticids stalked nondisplaying more often than displaying lures). In another experiment, we ascertained that it is specifically the interjection of display posture that deters stalking. When ant-eating salticids that had already begun stalking experienced lures that switched from a nondisplay to a display posture, they stopped stalking.


--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
  365 replies since Sep. 21 2007,11:31 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (13) < 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]