Shared Homologous Trait: Moles & Dolphins
The ideal environment for a Mole to thrive would be in wetlands, grasslands, and meadows, consisting of loose, movable soil in which they can tunnel into. They have also adapted to arid climates within deserts, and are known for their poor eyesight and excellent tunneling ability, creating approximately 160 ft. burrows overnight. All this digging requires strong arm and leg structures to push dirt to the sides and then behind them as they burrow. Meanwhile, being cetaceans of aquatic animals, Dolphins choose to inhabit warm coastal bodies of water and can swim up to 62 miles per day at an average of 31 mph. They, too, require strong arm structures to steer themselves and come to a stop while swimming at high speeds. During intense chases from predators, dolphins can easily turn and redirect their movement because of these front fins.
It's easy to write these two species off as entirely unrelated, seeing as moles are from the Eulipotyphla branch of mammals and dolphins stem from the Cetacean branch. However, the homologous forearm structures between the two show the ancestral link between the two, which would be the Eutherian (placental) mammal. This mammal hails from the late cretaceous period and is the ancestral link for a variety of mammals such as seals, beavers, and shrews. Almost all animals in this group have the same or similar forearm structures consisting of phalanges, carpals, metacarpals, etc. While the Cetacean and Eulipotyphla diverged on a grand scale to different environments, we can still see these similarities from their common shared mammalian ancestor to this day.
The anatomy of these two species is quite different, both physically and genetically; however, looking at the range of motion both have in their front limbs, you can see the shared dexterity. While dolphin fins have phalanges, they are covered by a thick layer of flesh with no individual digits, unlike a mole, which has access to each individual digit. Both, however, have phalanges to elongate their limbs and metacarpals for range of motion for precision with swimming and digging. Following this comparison up the limbs, we can see that the carpals are also in similar locations and allow the connecting points of the phalanges and arm bones to rotate, allowing for more control. The arm bones themselves are similarly structured (humans share these structures as well as many other mammals), the radius and ulna being present allows both species to change their direction, shift weight as they crawl or swim, and move water and dirt to travel. Lastly and most powerfully, the humerus of the Dolphin as well as the Mole share similar placement and structure, being the main weight-bearing bone within the front limbs. The combination of these shared arm structures shows the genetic ancestry shared between these species and the fact that, despite their different environments, they have been able to utilize the same features for different evolved traits.
Shared Analogous Traits: Echidnas & Anteaters
Echidnas can be found throughout Australia and New Guinea, preferring the dry climate, brush, and forests. Their direct diet consists mostly of insects, especially colony insects such as ants and termites, using their long tongue to take hold of their prey and draw it into their long snout. Similarly, the Anteater, which hails from Central and South America, also uses a long, curved, textured tongue to draw ants, beetles, and termites out of colony holes and other hiding spots and into its snout. Both of these species use a long tongue and snout to extend into the recesses of small crevasses and colony holes of termites and ants to find food. This connects them through an Analogous trait, which we will expand upon.
Looking back far enough, the echidna's ancestor, the “Kryoryctes Cadburyi”, does share some common ancestor with the modern anteaters “Pro Tamandua”; however, the similarities in environmentally evolved snouts and tongues are simply survival-linked and do not come from their ancestral lineage. This in itself makes the shared trait analogous rather than homologous, as the monotreme Kryoryctes Cadburyi was more closely compared to an aquatic-dwelling platypus than a land mammal. The egg-laying nature of this species is described as Monotremata and differs greatly from the Xenarthra Placental mammals that the anteater evolved from. While classified as a mammal, it lays its offspring as eggs, while the other gives birth to offspring, much like humans and other placental mammals.
The formation of the long snout of the anteater came from the evolutionary pressures and natural selection of the individuals within the species, not being limited to large prey crawling on the ground, but rather being able to follow an entire insect colony back to its source, increasing its chances of survival. Much like this, the echidna's evolutionary process took place in far more tropical climates where much of the insect biodiversity on the planet can be found. With this large influx of insects comes a large variety of birds, mammals, and reptiles that will seek them as a food source, making the environment fairly competitive. This competition fueled the genetic preference for a long snout and tongue to find insects in tree logs, ground colonies, rocks, and other crevice-containing vessels that would be difficult with stubby, inflexible snouts and beaks. The flexibility of these snouts is also a very advantageous feature of both the Anteater and the echidna's snouts, which diversifies them from their ancestors. Both adapted to portray this visual and genetic similarity on different continents, and while they eat similar foods and share similar visual traits, they stem from different branches of mammals and did not carry the trait homologous but rather, Analogously.
Research References:
Comparative Anatomy as Evidence for Evaluation.
www.labxchange.org/library/items/lb:LabXchange:acfccc5f:lx_image:1
“Dolphin Physiology - Dolphin Research Center.” Dolphin Research Center, dolphins.org/physiology.
Echidna | San Diego Zoo Animals and Plants. animals.sandiegozoo.org/animals/echidna.
“Facts About Dolphins.” World Animal Protection Aoteroa New Zealand
www.worldanimalprotection.org.nz/education/animal-facts/dolphins.
Smithsonian’s National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute. “Giant Anteater.” Smithsonian’s
National Zoo and Conservation Biology Institute, nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/giant-anteater.
Hello Alicia,
ReplyDeleteYour blog post is incredibly unique and eye-catching! I wasn't aware that the echidna shared a common (though analogous) trait with an anteater! Your explanation for why the formation of the echidna and the formation of the anteater's snout is similar was very thorough and showed your deep understanding of the subject matter. It's also interesting how these organisms evolved in different continents, meaning there must be a difference (even if it's slight) in the terrain, yet these traits are still favorable. What do you think this signifies? I'd love to hear your theory! Great work!
Alicia
ReplyDeleteI was very intrigued with the choices of species for the homologous trait. I wouldn't think moles and dolphins have a homologous trait or a shared ancestor for that matter since they are vastly different. Great job in explaining. I feel like I truly learned and once I finish reading it made total sense as to how they do have homologous traits. The explanation of the bones in similar structure but leading to different functions is remarkable. It is similar to how whales, humans and birds along with all have similar structures but different functions. Thank you and wonderful job.
Hi Alicia
ReplyDeleteI agree this is an excellent summary of the two homologous and comparable characteristics. It clearly shows how moles and dolphins have a common ancestor in their forelimb architecture, yet echidnas and anteaters evolved similar traits such as long snouts with tongues differently through convergent evolution. I loved how you described not only the anatomy, nevertheless the environmental constraints that caused these changes, very interesting and clearly thought out.
Hi Alicia, You did a really good job exploring how the environment and adaptation affected these traits. As we read, natural selection is directional. Those with traits that can survive in the environment live to reproduce, while those who do not have such advantageous traits die. I also analyzed the fins of dolphins, only I compared them to the analogous fins of sharks. I see the similarities between the front fins of dolphins and front arms of moles. While dolphins use them for swimming, moles use them for digging.
ReplyDeleteHomology:
ReplyDelete1. (5/5) - Great opening description.
3. (4/5) - Understand that the word "Eutherian" isn't a species. It is a description of a type of organism that develops their young in a placenta. This would include all mammals except for marsupials (where part of the development occurs in the pouch, like kangaroos) and monotremes (egg-laying mammals, like the platypus). But we don't need to identify a specific archaic mammal to understand how these traits are homologous.
Looking back, it seems like this is responding to the third prompt regarding ancestry? All we need to do is confirm that the common ancestor was an archaic mammal, who passed on the forelimb trait to these two extant species, with changes occurring over time due to different environmental pressures, producing divergent evolution.
2. (5/5) - Good description of the traits, connecting the differences in environments producing the divergent evolution the results in differences in structure and function. You flipped the order. Try to follow the order in the guidelines. Makes it easier to grade.
4. (5/5) - Good images.
Analogy:
1. (5/5) - Good description.
3. (4/5) - You flipped the order again from the guidelines.
It's a little tougher to nail down the ancestry here, mainly because I'm not familiar with these two species, but echidnas are monotremes from the Monotremata order, and anteaters are from the Pilosa order so two completely different groupings. That wouldn't necessarily rule out homology (or direct descent) but the trait in question, namely the very narrow, tube-like snout, is a very unique trait and not generalized across the class mammalia. This suggests these are uniquely derived (not inherited) traits that arose independently in each species due to environmental pressures, making them indeed analogous. But I'd have to dig deeper to confirm this.
"the echidna's ancestor, the “Kryoryctes Cadburyi”, does share some common ancestor with the modern anteaters “Pro Tamandua”"
Well, all organisms do share a common ancestor with all other organisms, so this is a given. The question is whether the *trait* of the narrow snout comes from that common ancestor.
"This in itself makes the shared trait analogous rather than homologous"
I agree, but again, I'd have to dig a bit deeper to take this educated guess to confirmation. I agree with your logic, but would like more info, perhaps a phylogenetic tree of the two organisms to confirm this. Otherwise, good work here.
2. (5/5) - Very good explanation here, connecting the specific environmental pressure (the availability of insects as a food resource) to the convergent evolution of the trait.
4. (5/5) - Good images.