St. Bernard Study Shows Human-directed Evolution At Work (10/28/2007)
 |
| op: the skull from a St. Bernard dog, donated to the Natural History Museum in Berne, Switzerland, in 1892. Bottom: another St. Bernard skull, donated to the museum in 1976. The most obvious difference to be seen from these photos is the angle between the top of the nose and the forehead. This angle is more acute in the modern dog. (Credit: Copyright Abby Drake) |
The St Bernard dog – named after the 11th century priest Bernard of Menthon – is living proof that evolution does occur, say scientists.
Biologists at The University of Manchester say that changes to the shape of the breed's head over the years can only be explained through human-directed evolution through selective breeding, an artificial version of natural selection.
The team, led by Dr Chris Klingenberg in the Faculty of Life Sciences, examined the skulls of 47 St Bernards spanning 120 years, from modern examples to those of dogs dating back to the time when the breed standard was first defined.
"We discovered that features stipulated in the breed standard of the St Bernard became more exaggerated over time as breeders selected dogs that had the desired physical attributes," said Dr Klingenberg.
"In effect they have applied selection to move the evolutionary process a considerable way forward, providing a unique opportunity to observe sustained evolutionary change under known selective pressures."
The findings, published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, are based on studies of St Bernard skulls donated by Swiss breeders to the Natural History Museum in Berne.
Compared to their ancestors, modern St Bernards have broader skulls, while the angle between the nose and the forehead is steeper in modern dogs and they have also developed a more pronounced ridge above the eyes.
"These changes are exactly in those features described as desirable in the breed standards. They are clearly not due to other factors such as general growth and they provide the animal with no physical advantage, so we can be confident that they have evolved purely through the selective considerations of breeders.
"Creationism is the belief that all living organisms were created according to Genesis in six days by 'intelligent design' and rejects the scientific theories of natural selection and evolution.
"But this research once again demonstrates how selection -- whether natural or, in this case, artificially influenced by man -- is the fundamental driving force behind the evolution of life on the planet."
The research was funded by the Leverhulme Trust.
Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by the University of Manchester.
Comments:
| 1. |
missing the point |
12/14/2007 9:55:02 AM MST |
One point that is always over looked and missed quoted is that Creationist don't believe in natural selection and change within a species. This is not true. Many (not all) young earth creationist believe in natural or man guided selection. see: http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v23/i3/muddywaters.asp But what is not often stated is that never has anyone ever witnessed a change from one species to another. (such as apes to humans) Nor has there ever been TRUE evidence of transitional fossils. We find thousands of fossil remains of animals but never do we find a transitional fossil. On occasion we hear of the "missing link" being found only to have scientist to continue to look for it. If evolution does cause one species to evolve into another then why is it so hard to find any definitive proof of these changes? |
| 2. |
Tom |
12/15/2007 10:16:19 PM MST |
Try : http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part2c.html
for a partial example list of transitional fossils...
|
| 3. |
cow |
12/27/2007 10:42:05 PM MST |
I have never seen a branch of a tree turn into a trunk, but I'm quite sure it happens all the time..problem with creationists, is they want to see a jump from fish to ferret. They want to see a fish walk out fo the water and become a ferret and dont understand that transitions, on how a nose can form without the creature drowning. I guess it comes from a bad concept of time.. it didnt take 6000 years i'll tell ya that to go from ape to man. |
| 4. |
Christian FAQed |
4/14/2008 9:59:13 AM MST |
How is this solid evidence for evolution? This dog didn't even change species of dog much less prove evolution. Creationists do not argue adaptation, it's the idea that dinosaurs became birds and fish became reptiles. For that there is no evidence only speculation and assumption... this does not come close to proving evolution. |
Leave a Reply:
| 
Subscribe
