Oops. More intermediary fossils found.

GeoffP

Caput gerat lupinum
Valued Senior Member
Another intermediary in the evolution to land-based tetrapods is finally cornered. Hello, little wannabe-amphibian! So the horror of the gaps shrinks yet again. (Shrinkage being a general problem in water anyway.)

But, to be fair to religious literalism, the fossils were found in the flat part of the earth.

Fossil helps document shift from sea to land

By Sid Perkins
June 25th, 2008
Web edition

Fossils yield insight into early tetrapod evolution

New fossils of an ancient, four-limbed creature help fill in the blanks of the evolutionary transition between fish and the first land-adapted vertebrates.

Fossils of creatures that span the water-to-land transition of vertebrates are few and far between. One of those pioneers, Ventastega curonica, was first described in 1994 but previously has been known only from fragmentary remains unearthed from 365-million-year-old rocks at a site in western Latvia. Fossils found at the site during subsequent excavations now allow scientists to more fully reconstruct the creature, says Per Ahlberg, a paleontologist at Uppsala University in Sweden.

reconstruction.jpg


The new remains — including most of the creature’s skull, the braincase, half of the bones in its forelimb and a quarter of its pelvic girdle — suggest that Ventastega was an evolutionary intermediate between Tiktaalik, a four-limbed fish that lived about 382 million years ago (SN: 6/17/06, p. 379), and subsequent tetrapods such as Acanthostega, which were capable of walking on land.

The size and proportions of the new fossils hint that Ventastega probably measured between 1 and 1.3 meters in length. Most features of the creature’s skull match those of Tiktaalik, which lived millions of years earlier, but the overall shape of the skull and braincase “is characteristically ‘early tetrapod,’” Ahlberg says. Likewise, the creature’s lower jawbone was shaped like that of early tetrapods but was adorned with fangs like those found in its fishy predecessors, he notes. “Ventastega was a mosaic of features.”

Ventastega lived approximately during the same era as Acanthostega, but its features were more primitive, a sign that Ventastega may have been an evolutionary holdover, Ahlberg says. Nevertheless, the size and shape of Ventastega’s limb bones, particularly those of its forelimbs, suggest that the creature’s limbs ended in digits, not fins.

The fossil record suggests that the evolutionary transition between fish and early tetrapods was smooth. Over millions of years, these creatures’ eyes grew larger and their snouts became broader while the overall size of the skull decreased somewhat, Ahlberg and his colleagues report in the June 26 Nature.

The new fossils of Ventastega “are great,” says Neil Shubin, a paleontologist at the University of Chicago. Although the newly described remains include just a few bones, “they’re very informative,” he adds. The earliest tetrapods probably evolved between 5 million and 7 million years before Tiktaalik, he notes, and the new fossils will help researchers predict what those creatures would have looked like.

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/33623/title/Fossil_helps_document_shift_from_sea_to_land

An earlier article illustrates what was known prior to Ventastega:

chart_400.jpg


Presumably Ventastega lies between Tiktaalik and what I presume is Acanthostega, peeking back at his newly installed hindquarters. "Four wheel drive. Nice."
 
Can we keep references to religion out of Biology? If you want to discuss creationism, please do not post it in B and G. Just stick to evidence based science.
 
I just did. What is you want to know about? I'm not an expert on the period, but the accumulating evidence does have the effect of minimizing the fossil record gaps that are taken as evidence that Adam and Eve were real n' such.
 
It is promising.

But some of the leaps of imagination done with very partial fossil finds are well documented, even in modern times.

I hope a more complete fossil is found, revealing more of a concrete proof and less conjecture.
 
This isn't a mere molar. This is a braincase, limb and pelvic girdle. That's a substantial find.
 
Geoff,
the article is from a year ago. Has anything new been added to it since then? Have they found more fossils of this animal?
 
This isn't a mere molar. This is a braincase, limb and pelvic girdle. That's a substantial find.

Well, it's more than a molar to be sure.

That is only one case, the molar, maybe it's the best known.

There is a lot more of this in paleontology, including in recent times.
 
I'm not an expert on the period, but the accumulating evidence does have the effect of minimizing the fossil record gaps that are taken as evidence that Adam and Eve were real n' such.

Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromsome Adam were real people from whom we can all trace our origins. Or don't you believe you were born of parents, who were born of parents, who were born of parents, etc.?
 
Last edited:
Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromsome Adam were real people from whom we can all trace our origins. Or don't you believe you were born of parents, who were born of parents, who were born of parents, etc.?
We lament the general lack of humor in science, until some snarky scientists give names like Y-Chromosome Adam and Mitochondrial Eve to two rather ordinary people who didn't even live in the same era (60KYA and 170KYA, respectively) and who were both born in the usual unremarkable way.

As Wikipedia says:
The name may seem to imply that Y-chromosomal Adam was the only living male of his time. . . .
We don't need to promote that implication.
 
Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromsome Adam were real people from whom we can all trace our origins. Or don't you believe you were born of parents, who were born of parents, who were born of parents, etc.?

I could believe in a gaggle of related Eves and Adams. But by definition, there will be no "single ancestor".
 
Here's some fresh science that is relevant....

Africans' Deep Genetic Roots Reveal Their Evolutionary Story

Ann Gibbons

In the largest study ever of African genetic diversity, an international team of researchers has analyzed nuclear DNA collected over a decade from 113 populations of Africans from across the continent. In a report published online in Science this week, the team has found that Africans are descended from 14 ancestral populations, which often correlate with language and cultural groups. They found that all hunter-gatherers and pygmies in Africa today shared ancestors 35,000 years ago and that East Africa was the source of the great migration that populated the rest of the world. They also found that African-American individuals, on average, have mixed ancestry from all over western Africa, which will make it difficult to trace roots to specific ethnic groups.

Full story at http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/324/5927/575?sa_campaign=Email/sntw/1-May-2009/10.1126/science.324_575 (Requires subscription to Science magazine.)
 
Yep. Single Eve always was a crock of shit.

Sorry, sorry: exceedingly unlikely would be our phrase. Mea culpa.
 
I said ancestor, not mtDNA sequence, dumbass. Don't you have a house to haunt?
 
Back
Top