Questions about Evolution?

[DarkSun]

Not at all...
They aren't immune per say... but they are far more resistant.
Plants seem to be able to handle the extra product that the additional chromosomes produce.

I'm not 100% sure why personally... though my guess is that it's because plants don't use biochemical signals in quite the same way as animals, and thus extra product may not be as damaging.

So it's totally not a silly question... it's actually something that I wonder about too... I'll have to see if the botany professor at my university has any idea.

wa:do

Okay, another random question, but...

How long do you think it would take for a plant to evolve in such a way that it would develop animal-like abilities as years and generations progress? Would it be possible?

I want some walking trees like the ones from Lord of the Rings.

 

[painted wolf]

Okay, another random question, but...

How long do you think it would take for a plant to evolve in such a way that it would develop animal-like abilities as years and generations progress? Would it be possible?

I want some walking trees like the ones from Lord of the Rings

Why would plants want to?
Plants already exploit animals to get what they want from us... we carry their seeds far and wide in our guts, we defend them from attack, we act as their food.

Otherwise what 'animal like' abilities are you thinking.
Plants can move and respond to stimuli (they can't wander around but they can move, sometimes pretty quickly)
Plants can communicate to one another and to insects to warn of danger and summon help.

wa:do

 

[DarkSun]

Why would plants want to?
Plants already exploit animals to get what they want from us... we carry their seeds far and wide in our guts, we defend them from attack, we act as their food.

Otherwise what 'animal like' abilities are you thinking.
Plants can move and respond to stimuli (they can't wander around but they can move, sometimes pretty quickly)
Plants can communicate to one another and to insects to warn of danger and summon help.

wa:do

Sorry, my question wasn't really serious. It was more of a joke, really. I was just wondering how long it would take for a certain tree of some kind to evolve in such a way that it would be able to move around, communicate and make conscious, complex decisions.

But I guess the answer is: "why would it need to?"

 

[fantome profane]

I want some walking trees like the ones from Lord of the Rings.

or The Day of the Triffids.


And I really got hot when I saw Janet Scott Fight a Triffid that spits poison and kills.

 

[DarkSun]

or The Day of the Triffids.


And I really got hot when I saw Janet Scott Fight a Triffid that spits poison and kills.

. . .

PW . . .

How long would it take for a tree to evolve into Janet Scott?

 

[painted wolf]

There would have to be a very good selective reason to drive evolution in such a direction...
As I said, they can move as much as they need to already and they can communicate pretty well as it is. (again for what they need it to do for them)

Communication implies some sort of "thought"... but not likely to a high degree.

Something like an Ent would have massive problems to overcome... it certainly would not evolve from a tree, however much it may look like one.

Trees are mostly dead wood... the living parts of the tree are several layers of cells just inside the bark and then the leaves and shoots... the rest is dead and provides either structural support or protection from the elements/predation.

wa:do

Ironically the triffid is more likely than the Ent. But not by much.

 

[DarkSun]

There would have to be a very good selective reason to drive evolution in such a direction...
As I said, they can move as much as they need to already and they can communicate pretty well as it is. (again for what they need it to do for them)

Communication implies some sort of "thought"... but not likely to a high degree.

Something like an Ent would have massive problems to overcome... it certainly would not evolve from a tree, however much it may look like one.

Trees are mostly dead wood... the living parts of the tree are several layers of cells just inside the bark and then the leaves and shoots... the rest is dead and provides either structural support or protection from the elements/predation.

wa:do

Ironically the triffid is more likely than the Ent. But not by much.

Let's say we had a time-span of several billion years.

Would evolution like this be possible? If so, would you be able to suggest possible mutations?

(Why am I finding this so amusing? )

 

[painted wolf]

Not from a tree... perhaps another plant.
Evolution can only work with what it has... when you have most of your mass taken up by dead material, you don't have a lot to work with.

Perhaps from something like a venus flytrap? You would have the start of a hydrostatic skeleton to provide movement.

wa:do

 

[DarkSun]

Not from a tree... perhaps another plant.
Evolution can only work with what it has... when you have most of your mass taken up by dead material, you don't have a lot to work with.

Perhaps from something like a venus flytrap? You would have the start of a hydrostatic skeleton to provide movement.

wa:do

wa:do

I feel so disillusioned right now...

Are you meaning to say that the Ents are impossible creatures...? It can't be true! I read it in a book!

 

[painted wolf]

Ent's won't be 'trees'....

wa:do

 

[fantome profane]

Something like an Ent would have massive problems to overcome... it certainly would not evolve from a tree, however much it may look like one.

Ent's won't be 'trees'....

wa:do

Right, but what if they evolved from some other animal to mimic trees, much like stick or leaf insects, but on a large scale? I guess we would have to start with something that kinda looked like a tree to begin with, however slightly, so that natural selection would have something to start with. Then we would need some kind of predator that might mistake this animal for a tree, even if it is only one out of a thousand times. Then we would have a situation where something like an Ent might evolve.

(just havin fun)

 

[linwood]

Then we would need some kind of predator that might mistake this animal for a tree, even if it is only one out of a thousand times. Then we would have a situation where something like an Ent might evolve.

Wouldn`t that cause those traits to make the animal "tree-like" to become detrimental to the animals survival and actually "select" against such traits.

In other words what you`d end up with would be very un-entlike.

 

[fantome profane]

Wouldn`t that cause those traits to make the animal "tree-like" to become detrimental to the animals survival and actually "select" against such traits.

In other words what you`d end up with would be very un-entlike.

Perhaps I didn’t express the concept very well. I am assuming the predator is not actually after the tree but rather after something with a little more meat, and would ignore something it mistakes for a tree.

Imagine that we are starting with a species that has a vague resemblance to a tree, perhaps only when viewed from a distance, through a fog, and at a strange angle. And also consider that within this species some individuals will look more tree like than individuals in that species. And the less tree-like individuals would be spotted by the predator first, from a greater difference, more often. So the less tree-like individuals would be weeded out of the gene pool more often than the more tree-like individuals. The selective advantage need be only slight.

This part is actually not that far fetched, this is exactly what happed with stick insects, and some of these species look amazingly like sticks and leaves with an incredible amount of detail. So why not a tree?

However I do admit that this is a little bit ridiculous as I don’t know of any animal that looks enough like a tree to have a starting point for natural selection, and I don’t know of any predator that would swoop down and grab something the size of a tree. This is just a fun hypothetical.

 

[painted wolf]

I'm afraid that insects will never reach tree size... Not in this gravity or atmosphere.
They are limited by their exoskeletons and breathing.

wa:do

 

[fantome profane]

I'm afraid that insects will never reach tree size... Not in this gravity or atmosphere.
They are limited by their exoskeletons and breathing.

wa:do

Ok, so why couldn’t a mammal or reptile develop this kind of mimicry? They do develop different forms of camouflage.

Perhaps it is just because an exoskeleton may have some superficial resemblance to the dead wood of twigs or leaves even before natural selection takes over, unlike skin, fur or hair. But still…

(actually I would be more afraid if insects could reach tree size )

 

[painted wolf]

I suppose it's vaguely possible... the question would be .... why evolve in this way?

wa:do

 

[fantome profane]

I suppose it's vaguely possible... the question would be .... why evolve in this way?

wa:do

For the amusement of Tolkien fans. Hey, we already got hobbits.

 

[lunamoth]

Perhaps I didn’t express the concept very well. I am assuming the predator is not actually after the tree but rather after something with a little more meat, and would ignore something it mistakes for a tree.

Imagine that we are starting with a species that has a vague resemblance to a tree, perhaps only when viewed from a distance, through a fog, and at a strange angle. And also consider that within this species some individuals will look more tree like than individuals in that species. And the less tree-like individuals would be spotted by the predator first, from a greater difference, more often. So the less tree-like individuals would be weeded out of the gene pool more often than the more tree-like individuals. The selective advantage need be only slight.

This part is actually not that far fetched, this is exactly what happed with stick insects, and some of these species look amazingly like sticks and leaves with an incredible amount of detail. So why not a tree?

However I do admit that this is a little bit ridiculous as I don’t know of any animal that looks enough like a tree to have a starting point for natural selection, and I don’t know of any predator that would swoop down and grab something the size of a tree. This is just a fun hypothetical.

An animal that is tree-sized would need to get a lot of food to come to it to maintain its size. And, if it moved like an animal to get the food it needs, then the tree mimicry would not be an advantage.

 

[fantome profane]

An animal that is tree-sized would need to get a lot of food to come to it to maintain its size. And, if it moved like an animal to get the food it needs, then the tree mimicry would not be an advantage.

Perhaps, good point. But stick insects get around pretty well (nice avatar btw). Perhaps tree mimicry would also aid it in catching its food (birds for instance). And have you even seen a baby deer in alone in the forest? They can stand perfectly still in one place for hours.

Seriously I realize it is a very far fetched idea, but I am just having fun with it.

 

[rojse]

Perhaps we need to get a mad scientist to work on these walking trees, and forget about evolution's role here.