otokage007
Well-Known Member
Since when algae are plants? :/
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Creationist objections to plant evolution?
- Thread starter mycorrhiza
- Start date
Since when algae are plants? :/
johnhanks
Well-Known Member
if two plants hybridise and produce fertile offspring, the BSC says they are by definition the same species.
As a rule, the emergence of new plant species following hybridisation has involved the production of a sterile hybrid, the sterility resulting from the two sets of parental chromosomes being too dissimilar to pair and undergo meiosis. Accidental doubling of chromosome number (allopolyploidy) then restores fertility, but isolates the hybrid from either of the parental types, clinching speciation. Examples of this mode of speciation, in both wild and cultivated plants, are numerous and well-documented.
otokage007
Well-Known Member
yes i'm aware of that. But truth is, when I was a student, none of my professors of botany or plant physiology would agree that just because two different plants produce fertile offspring, they are the same species. I think it's actually a controversial topic for them. And it is even more controversial in the case of bacteria.
dust1n
Zindīq
Most algaes are considered part of the plant kingdom. I'm just curious as to what a biblical listing of plant types is to serve exactly in the discussion. Was that an argument against plant evolution or something? Just seems to be an incomplete list made a long time ago for no real particular reason.
otokage007
Well-Known Member
dust1n
Zindīq
I've never ever heard such a thing. But ok.
I meant to say most algae aren't part of the plant kingdom.
Some typos can be devastating. 
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
As far as I know.... No algae are part of the plant kingdom.I meant to say most algae aren't part of the plant kingdom.
wa:do
mycorrhiza
Well-Known Member
Aren't green algae part of the plant kingdom? Or are they protists?
otokage007
Well-Known Member
Depends on the classification u are using. In some, they are included into protist. But I've never heard a classification that put any algae into the plant kingdom. Appart from some doing the photosyntesis, a plant and an alga have nothing in common!
Now that I think of it, when a botanist speaks about "vegetable", they are referring to plants, algae and fungi. So that they have in common, they are vegetables
Last edited:
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
Kinds is a Biblical description. i figured a biblical perpective might be helpful.
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
So it's an animal?
dust1n
Zindīq
Chlorophyta? Streptophytina algae?
dust1n
Zindīq
Red and brown algaes (and some others) are considered protists now-a-days.
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
Dang it, why do they have to keep changing things!
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Controversially... there is a lot of debate as to where to draw the phylum line dividing plants and green algae. Enough that in most plylogenies/cladograms they are considered the "sister group" to "the plants".
This one I will totally grant you. These guys are the most basal of the "plants" and are the group the land plants evolved from.
Though they are not considered "true plants" which is exclusive to the ferns, mosses, conifers and flowering plants. :cover:
Plant phylogenetics is really complex, I'm glad I deal with animals who are so much easier.
wa:do
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
LoL... if only we stopped trying to figure things out and let well enough alone.
Wait...Then I'd be out of a future job! :sad4:
wa:do
Plant phylogenetics is really complex, I'm glad I deal with animals who are so much easier.
If you think plants are bad, you should try micobiology!
dust1n
Zindīq
dust1n
Zindīq
Controversially... there is a lot of debate as to where to draw the phylum line dividing plants and green algae. Enough that in most plylogenies/cladograms they are considered the "sister group" to "the plants".
This one I will totally grant you. These guys are the most basal of the "plants" and are the group the land plants evolved from.
Though they are not considered "true plants" which is exclusive to the ferns, mosses, conifers and flowering plants. :cover:
Plant phylogenetics is really complex, I'm glad I deal with animals who are so much easier.
wa:do
Yeah well, APG III is still pretty new so there are some chinks to be worked out. I doubt it will be last classification system. We went from "it photosynthesizes, doesn't it" to "well it has chlorophyll a and b in chloroplast, doesn't it?" to... well I don't know yet.
Divisions at the earlier parts are intense because it's basically chemical differences. Guess a line has to be drawn somewhere, but multiple peoples gots the stick!
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
Chemical, genetic and morphological... how important is a cell wall, for example.Yeah well, APG III is still pretty new so there are some chinks to be worked out. I doubt it will be last classification system. We went from "it photosynthesizes, doesn't it" to "well it has chlorophyll a and b in chloroplast, doesn't it?" to... well I don't know yet.
Divisions at the earlier parts are intense because it's basically chemical differences. Guess a line has to be drawn somewhere, but multiple peoples gots the stick!
wa:do