Jump to content

What are the differences of Microevolution and Macroevolution???...


Recommended Posts

What are the differences of Microevolution and Macroevolution???...

 

First Example:

Tiger = 38 Chromosomes

Lion = 38 Chromosomes

 

In the Zoo they make fertil offspring of Hybrids of Tiger+Lion and of Lion+Tiger

 

Second Example:

Horse = 64 Chromosomes

Donkey = 62 Chromosomes

 

They make Mule Hybrids = 63 Chromosomes that are NOT fertil

 

In the First example Macroevolution seems to be Microevolution in large time...

 

In the Second example the Macroevolution seems to be one chromosom Number change...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species. Despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evoscales_01

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to see the relevant quote from the authors. If you aren't a creationist or a proponent of ID, then microevolution is just focused on the details, like natural selection, mutation, genetic drift, gene flow, while macroevolution is focused on the bigger picture, common descent, speciation, as well as environmental/geological influences over vast amounts of time.

 

As Delta1212 mentioned, the recipe is the same whether you're looking at a slice of cake or the whole cake. I've seen creationists try to insist that microevolution is real (because it's pretty plainly happening every day), but macroevolution is not (mostly because of willful misunderstandings about what fossils are). Creationists don't want Earth to be very old, and don't look at all the evidence that supports speciation and common ancestry. They want to make a false distinction between the two different perspectives of the same phenomenon, for religious purposes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am NOT a creatonist.

I believe in Darvinian Evolution...

I have read a lot of Biology Books about Evolution!!!

 

THANK you for your reply!!!

 

Excellent!

 

Darwin did the groundwork for evolutionary theory, and today it's arguably one of the strongest, best supported theories science has. Evolution is a fact, and the Theory of Evolution gets stronger every day, whether you look at the details or the big picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please can you write me a good Book about Macroevolution???

 

Or is it a MISTAKE to call it Macroevolution and Microevolution???...

 

I personaly have a problem to separate them

because you don't know where the Microevolution ends and where the Macroevolution starts...

 

Second there are Animals Like the Penguin where you cannot say if it is a Bird or a Fish (like the Dolphins)

because it is on the 1/2 way of the Evolution to a Fish Life!!!...

 

Third Evolution always changes the species and never stops...

 

So, the Lion and the Tiger can be two(2) separate species...

but on another view they can be the same species with a different Phenotype...

 

Koni :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or is it a MISTAKE to call it Macroevolution and Microevolution???...

 

I personaly have a problem to separate them

because you don't know where the Microevolution ends and where the Macroevolution starts...

 

Exactly! Evolution is measured in populations over vast amounts of time, but the changes to each generation are usually small. But no matter how many generations you're looking at, it's still just evolution.

 

My favorite way to show this is the laryngeal nerve. In the first vertebrates, this nerve connected their gills to their brains. As these little fish evolved into everything else that has a backbone, some species lost their gill function, but later used it to form a larynx capable of making sounds. But the nerve connection, as the many various species evolved, got wrapped under the heart. As species grew in different ways and sizes, the laryngeal nerve grew longer, so instead of a short nerve from our brains to our throats, it goes down past the larynx, wraps under the heart, and then goes back to the throat.

 

There's a great video of Richard Dawkins dissecting the throat of a giraffe and exposing this nerve. From the giraffe's brain, under the heart, and back up again to the larynx is a good four and a half meters. Evidence that small changes in allele frequency in populations over time eventually lead to really big changes and speciation. Even changes that don't make sense, or give benefit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to my First question...

 

The Apes> Orangutan, Gorilla and 2 Chimpanzees have 2*23+XY = 48 Chromosomes

 

Human has 2*22+XY = 46 Chromosomes

 

One Ape Chromosome + Another Ape Chromosome = One Human Chromosome...

 

HOW DID THIS HAPEN???...

On one Egg or one Sperm???...

On the Germ Line???...

 

How did this Chromosomes-Number change spread into a population of Apeshumans???...

 

THANK You for your Help!!!

 

Koni

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is due to fusion of chromosome 2 in humans. Essentially it is a form chromosomal rearrangement (i.e. in other apes it is present as two separate chromosomes, in humans it is fused).

Fusion or breakage can lead to symptoms but as a whole does stop the chromosomes from doing their work (e.g. mitosis still works out as the homologous areas still align with each other, even through a break).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You write that mitosis still works out as the homologous areas still align with each other...!!!

 

If I understand right, so a fused Chromosome can still align with the two separate Chromosomes...!!!

 

I didn't knew that this is possible...!!!

 

Thank You very-very much...!!!

 

You answered a question that I had a long time...!!!

 

Have a nice Day - every Day !!!

 

THANK YOU

 

Koni

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello I am just reading the German Book: Evolutionsbiologie from Ulrich Kutschera...

 

By the definition of Micro-evolution and Macro-evolution, he writes that:

Microevolution is when - as example - from a fish species-A they are evolved the fish species-B and fish species-C...with the same Body-architectur...

Macroevolution is when - as example - a fish species-A is evolved to a amphibian species-B...with a different Body-architectur!!!...

 

So, with this definitions, the evolution from Apes-Humans to Apes and Humans belongs to Microevolution...

 

Where is then the Meso-evolution???...

 

THANK You!!!...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Evolution of Humans is Micro-evolution, Meso-evolution or Macro-evolution???...

 

Do you see why, when we're talking about a single process that spans multiple generations, there is no meaningful distinction between micro/macro/meso. It's all the same, it works the same way, and the only difference is where you look on the scale of time.

 

Go back to Delta1212's early example. You're asking if the recipe was different between the cake and various sized slices of the cake. The recipe is the same. Looking at a single species and how they've evolved to date is just slicing the cake differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand very well that it is only EVOLUTION and not micro-meso-macro...

But in all the Biology Books they write about micro-evolution and macro-evolution...

 

1a) micro-evolution is evolution inside a group of organisms which make SEX together... (anagenesis)

1b) macro-evolution is evolution between two(2) separeted groups which don't make SEX together... (kladogenesis)

 

2a) micro-evolution is evolution of an organism to another NEW organism with the same body-architectur...

(from a frog species to another NEW frog species)

2b) macro-evolution is evolution of an organism to another NEW organism with a different NEW body-architectur...

(from a amphibian species to another NEW reptile species)

 

So, we can add the aboves to:

micro-evolution = 1a

meso-evolution = 1b = 2a

macro-evolution = 2b

 

So, with the above...

from the common ancestor of Humans and Apes (australopithecus) to the Homo-Sapiens and Chimpanzees

is it microevolution - macroevolution or mesoevolution???...

 

IF we Look at the same features it is meso-evolution...

IF we Look at the different features it is macro-evolution...

 

I understand that it is only EVOLUTION !!!

 

But I have to ask...

 

THANK You !!!

Edited by Koni
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you read please my above reply and answer me WHY all the Biology Books write about Microevolution and Macroevolution???...

(Not only the Kreatonists but the Evolutionists also...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The terms can be used in a number of contexts. For example if you are talking exclusively about large scale changes (say, in paleoecological context) it is clear that you are talking about e.g. clades or other larger groups rather than, say small molecular changes within a population. Microevolution is then used to delineate the opposite situation (e.g. talking about allele variation in a single population). I.e. a common use is to delineate changes that above or below the species level or equivalent. Obviously the boundaries are (as the species concept in self) not strictly defined. It is just sometimes a convenient term to establish context. Also, there are sometimes uses that are not typical (especially in blogs but sometimes also in poorly written highschool textbooks).

 

Note that evolutionism is never used in the scientific community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.