The Mystery of Evolution: One Down

My kids just informed me that they have seen an okapi evolving, or transitioning into a zebra

Okapi’s stripes appear to be no doubt the same as zebra’s…

Zebra, Equus quagga, Masai Mara Reserve, Kenya : Stock Photo

Well, at least we have one example of species transitioning into another…out of 10 billion and this one looks like a stunner….

I have to run!

I’ll fill in the rest when I get back…

Update!

It turns out that okapi is considered to be more closely related to giraffe than to zebra…if at all…That is surprising…because okapi and zebra do look alike just okapi is missing some stripes…No wonder my kids fell for it…as did some experts…

“…The okapi and the giraffe were assigned to the same order (Artiodactyla) because they both have cloven hooves, and to the same family (Giraffidae) because they share certain distinctive features: Both have large eyes and ears, thin lips and a long, extensible tongue that allows them to lick their entire face (even the ears); their backs slope upward from rump to withers; they also share the same dental formula: ( i 0/3, c 0/1, pm 3/3, m 3/3) × 3 = 32. Both, unlike any other mammal, have molars with rugose enamel and bony horns that remain covered with skin throughout life (Nowak 1999, vol. 2, p. 1085).

Yet the rump and legs of an okapi are covered with black-and-white stripes exactly like those of a zebra. Perhaps, then, if okapis had solid hooves instead of cloven ones, they would be classified as perissodactyls (Order Perissodactyla) and would be considered more closely related to zebras than to giraffes. An okapi is about the same size as a Burchell’s zebra.

The chromosome count of an okapi is also like that of a zebra, to which it is not supposed to be related, and unlike that of a giraffe. Giraffes have 30 chromosomes (Taylor et al. 1967; Hösli and Lang 1970; Koulisher et al. 1971), whereas okapis have a variable chromosome number of 44-46, depending on the animal in question; most seem to have 2n = 45 (Ulbrich and Schmitt 1969; Hösli and Lang 1970; Koulisher 1978). The chromosome number of Grevy’s zebra is 2n = 46 and plains zebras have 2n = 44 (Benirschke and Malouf 1967). Variation in chromosome count is itself unusual among mammals, but common in hybrids…”

The 14-16 chromosome difference between giraffe and okapi is striking isn’t it?

117 thoughts on “The Mystery of Evolution: One Down

  1. I just updated the OP…
    I love evolutionary nonsense…Now it is the giraffe > okapi supposed relation…everything fits…into a delusion…
    No meds for this kind of delusion exist…just an axe…
    Let stupidity rule!

  2. dazz:
    Your update doesn’t seem to suggest it was a set up at all. Just saying

    Watch Columbo… You may understand…

    Also the title of my OP#7 “…prelude to something greater…”

  3. The 14-16 chromosome difference between giraffe and okapi is striking isn’t it?

    It was predicted by evolutionary theory.

  4. I would like to repeat my statement that this post is an abuse of posting privileges. And the “update” makes it worse.

  5. John Harshman:
    I would like to repeat my statement that this post is an abuse of posting privileges. And the “update” makes it worse.

    Your objection has been noted…
    Most of us can gather that the update makes it worse… for you…unless you can prove the miraclevolve disappearance of 14-16 chromosomes…in the process of miraclevolution…

    It’s probably a peace of cake for a clever miraclevolver like you LMO…

  6. dazz: You live in a parallel reality dude

    You don’t know what one bit what parallel reality is, so don’t school me!
    It’s enough embarrassment for you for one day…

  7. John Harshman:
    I would like to repeat my statement that this post is an abuse of posting privileges. And the “update” makes it worse.

    Well, but you think that the Nilsson Pelger eye artwork on a Macbook is science, and that is an abuse of the English language.

    Perhaps John thinks only fake stories which prop up nonsense theories of Lucky Accidents should be allowed here. I suspect Lizzie probably agrees, but she is looking for a new horse right now.

  8. John Harshman: I would like to repeat my statement that this post is an abuse of posting privileges. And the “update” makes it worse.

    John makes up stories about why birds have only one functioning ovary, and then places me on ignore for pointing out that he just made up a story. A clear case of abuse of not only his posting privilege but also a clear abuse of the Ignore feature.

    🙂

  9. phoodoo: Well, but you think that the Nilsson Pelger eye artwork on a Macbook is science, and that is an abuse of the English language.

    Perhaps John thinks only fake stories which prop up nonsense theories of Lucky Accidents should be allowed here.I suspect Lizzie probably agrees, but she is looking for a new horse right now.

    What are you talking about? John is trying to get to the truth…as he sees it…
    Anybody who exposes that is his enemy…

    He got burnt on this OP…but not as much as some other arrogant asses…

  10. Mung: John makes up stories about why birds have only one functioning ovary, and then places me on ignore for pointing out that he just made up a story. A clear case of abuse of not only his posting privilege but also a clear abuse of the Ignore feature.

    What is he? The Blind Birdwatcher? lol

  11. GlenDavidson: Is J-Mac not clueless about anything?

    I have a problem with double negatives. Is Glen not oblivious to non-evolution of Cambrian species? Davidson v Evolution.

  12. dazz:
    random humorous remark deletd, in case it’s misinterpreted

    I’ve had enough humorous remarks today at your and John the Miraclevolver’s expense today…Lol

  13. Mung: Is J-Mac not clueless about anything?

    Yes. I’m not…or should it be: No, I’m…

    After you think you have seen it all, yet another contender has emerged….lol

  14. Some important points here.
    First iNDEED all that is done in drawing relationiships in biolopgy is scoring traits. anatomical or genetic etc.
    This concept of making divisions based on traits was in error i say.
    No mammals, reptiles, and all the groups used here. These are inventions of man and not God and nature

    The Zebra having stripes has been described , I think by P.J Myers, evolutionist fame, as due to bugs. the bugs made the horses select for stripes that would confuse excessive bug irritation.
    In fact the okapi case i think disproves this unlikely claim.
    It has stripes but not all the body. So unless evolution just didn’t finish then stripes are not for debugging.

    Instead i see stripes as entirely about confusing predators. the horse , uniquely, is a moving creature. Only in herds. Yet its not just running that saves them. instead the stripes confuse a predator as it strikes. lIke some bird herds or white tailed deer.
    The zebra was not givin its margins for survival based on running but on herd movement, in a trot or gallop. the stripes make a predator confused as it strikes and then is winded too much.
    The okapi is partly saved by bl ending in the bush but upon being discovered also confuses predators in small herds with the help of stripes.
    I don’t see the stripes as helping merely camouflage.
    In these okapi is only a solitary creature in forests its only because of lack of predators that it survives. or some other option.

  15. J-Mac: Yes. I’m not…or should it be: No, I’m…

    Wait! You’re not not clueless? Does that mean your not not ignorant? Is that not not against the rules, claiming someone is not not ignorant? NOT NOT HELP ME!

  16. J-Mac: I’ve had enough humorous remarks today at your and John the Miraclevolver’s expense today…Lol

    Yet 10 billion species keep evolving while you brag about an imaginary accomplishment in an internet forum. Just saying

  17. Robert Byers,

    If I had known you were going to expose the evolution theory like that, I would have never even bothered to write this OP…
    BTW: Robert, do you usually finish drinking at this hour? I noticed that most of your comments are around this time or later and all indicating intoxication…

  18. J-Mac, to Byers:

    BTW: Robert, do you usually finish drinking at this hour? I noticed that most of your comments are around this time or later and all indicating intoxication…

    I look forward to a debate between J-Mac and Byers over whose comments are the least coherent.

  19. Adapa: I see Moe Larry and Curly AKA the three Creationist shitheads have defecated all over yet another thread.

    So now you have a nice warm place to sleep. 🙂

  20. keiths: I look forward to a debate between J-Mac and Byers over whose comments are the least coherent.

    Your comments that I am both for Wagner and against Wagner have to rank right up there in terms of incoherent nonsense.

  21. dazz: Yet 10 billion species keep evolving while you brag about an imaginary accomplishment in an internet forum. Just saying

    Don’t you ever give up?

    They are… in the parallel reality of yours….lol

  22. J-Mac: Can you elaborate on this what you meant here keiths?

    he simply means that species go extinct all the time, and when they do they stop evolving, obviously. Not rocket science

  23. dazz: he simply means that species go extinct all the time, and when they do they stop evolving, obviously. Not rocket science

    You already showed you rocket science knowledge…
    This question was for keiths…Can you read?

    Or you are still wondering what existing means???lol

  24. Mung,

    Your comments that I am both for Wagner and against Wagner have to rank right up there in terms of incoherent nonsense.

    Links, please.

  25. dazz: I’m sorry, but that’s sort of pathetic. Okapis are currently evolving. So are Zebras. What’s the point of this?

    How do you know okapis are evolving if they are at risk of extinction?
    I guess your buddy keiths is better informed…
    LMAO…
    Bye… bye boys!
    I have no time to waste…Life is too short to squander it on you…;-)

  26. J-Mac: How do you know okapis are evolving if they are at risk of extinction?

    I already told you why I think all species are evolving. All of them, even those we still don’t know about.

  27. Once again, the moment I ask Mung to back up his claim, he bolts.

    Come on, Mung. It’s not like anyone actually believed you in the first place.

    ETA: You’re certainly living up to your new avatar.

  28. keiths: Once again, the moment I ask Mung to back up his claim, he bolts.

    Meanwhile, you have been asked to to back up your claim. Once again, the moment I ask keiths to back up his claim, he bolts.

  29. J-Mac: Joe Felsenstein still owns an explanation…

    Yup, I own it, and I’m not selling it.

    (OK, that was probably an autocorrect error for “owe”)

    I stand by my statement (which was to agree with, I think, dazz) that all species are evolving, and given enough time will change enough to be considered new species. For example, ultimately they will be different enough that, if they encountered that ancestor, they would be reproductively isolated from it.

    And no, we don’t need to know what the species is going to become in order to say that. It will become increasingly different.

    And although it is not absolutely impossible that an okapi will turn into a zebra, so much would have to happen very precisely that it is astronomically improbable, an event that would not happen even once in the whole history of the Universe.

    Oh, and for the people who are talking about a gene for stripes, you need to read papers and a book by Jim Murray, a former colleague of mine, who has worked out much of the determination of color patterns by diffusion of color morphogens. See this Scientific American article.

Leave a Reply