18 replies to this topic

[Doki]

Talking of 'Survival of the fittest' and 'Natural Selection', which organism is the most evolved and which organism is the fittest to survive?

[mdfenko]

when i was in school (are you surprised that i can remember that far back?) i had a botany teacher who said that orchids were the most evolved life on earth. did i forget to mention that he was an orchidologist?

[hobglobin]

Talking of 'Survival of the fittest' and 'Natural Selection', which organism is the most evolved and which organism is the fittest to survive?

Actually this is a question you cannot answer as there are no fittest and most evolved organisms. Evolution has no aim, but is a random process. And you cannot compare species as every species is evolved far enough to cope with its environment (until now) and is fit enough to survive in its niche/range/environment. Otherwise it would have been replaced.
Don't try to compare apples and oranges...

[gebirgsziege]

The more I think about, the more I am sure the organisms I work with (at the moment some kind of fungal like protists) are the most evolved organisms

but here is one link for mdfenko: mixotrophy

[hobglobin]

The more I think about, the more I am sure the organisms I work with (at the moment some kind of fungal like protists) are the most evolved organisms

but here is one link for mdfenko: mixotrophy

All the parasites have the most apomorphic (derived) characteristics (sounds better than most evolved ). Aren't human beings, too kind of "earth parasites"?

[gebirgsziege]

The more I think about, the more I am sure the organisms I work with (at the moment some kind of fungal like protists) are the most evolved organisms

but here is one link for mdfenko: mixotrophy

All the parasites have the most apomorphic (derived) characteristics (sounds better than most evolved ). Aren't human beings, too kind of "earth parasites"?

the parasites have, but sometimes it seems as if they are only able to adopt very fast (in time-spans of evolution) and specific......

[mdfenko]

The more I think about, the more I am sure the organisms I work with (at the moment some kind of fungal like protists) are the most evolved organisms

but here is one link for mdfenko: mixotrophy

thanks for the link. interesting...

[GeorgeWolff]

This is very subjective. If you were to trace life back to an ancestor and then statistcaly compare DNA - perhaps yopu might have an answer for the most evolved - as in the greatest difference from the early DNA.

[gebirgsziege]

This is very subjective. If you were to trace life back to an ancestor and then statistcaly compare DNA - perhaps yopu might have an answer for the most evolved - as in the greatest difference from the early DNA.

but what about all the draw-backs of the DNA-phylogenies like e.g. long branch attraction in trees (this means a group of organisms spilt, but sometime later a certain char. was re-gained or lost again so they have very similar DNA seqs again)....
And in microbial phylogenies there are lots of proven events of HGT....so quite a number of genes is quite useless for phylogenies.....

early gene tree plants

[GeorgeWolff]

understand but consider that this would drive even greater diversity rather than homology.

[hobglobin]

This is very subjective. If you were to trace life back to an ancestor and then statistcaly compare DNA - perhaps yopu might have an answer for the most evolved - as in the greatest difference from the early DNA.

And what is the meaning of it? This is the most evolved species found compared to ancestor x. We offer a page in Guinness book of world records? And then another working group claims this record as they used another DNA part, other statistical methods, other ancestor...Not really science.

Edited by hobglobin, 05 February 2009 - 11:43 AM.

[robsabba]

Talking of 'Survival of the fittest' and 'Natural Selection', which organism is the most evolved and which organism is the fittest to survive?

Actually this is a question you cannot answer as there are no fittest and most evolved organisms. Evolution has no aim, but is a random process. And you cannot compare species as every species is evolved far enough to cope with its environment (until now) and is fit enough to survive in its niche/range/environment. Otherwise it would have been replaced.
Don't try to compare apples and oranges...

While I agree with most of what you wrote, Natural Selection is not a random process. While variants are generated randomly, Natural Selection itself is selective.

Edited by robsabba, 21 August 2009 - 06:11 AM.

[Adnan]

Evolution? If there is then Man is the most evolved ........but its a bit confusing because no organism to date is found to be perfect and when u look at any one it seems it has evolved the most and is the most well adapted organism..........
i dnt know how evolution worked to favour such changes that cell was formed? Cell is meant to be the ist organism in evolutionary tree but how was it formed? there are a lot of missing links, the fossil record is not complete and it cant answer the question raised to it thats y sometimes personally i feel it to be a fairy tale............evolution has great impact on biology as because of it this field improved as some tried to prove while some tried to disprove it...........................................

[bob1]

There is no most evolved, all organisms alive are equally evolved or they wouldn't be alive.

[gebirgsziege]

Yes all organisms are evolved enough to be alive, but some are adopting quicker than others towards changing environmental challages than others.......but I think nobody can say "this organism is more evolved than another"........but I think you can not say they are equally evolved either.

And: are we talking about "evolution" or "adaption" here?????