Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

theswaddle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 320 posts

Re: Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

#301

Post by junon »

theduder99 wrote: post #183
BitwiseFool wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of horses and horse-ancestors in the fossil record. We would at least expect to see some horn material preserved. Failing that, there would be evidence on the skull itself due to how the attachment of the horn would leave evidence of its existence on the bone of the skull. You would probably also expect to see some horns in archaeological caches. I know they sometimes find narwhal tusks in burial sit…

As a kid being taught evolution, I made the natural assumption that many transitional forms of animals would be found in the fossil record in order to support the theory. However that is not the case(to put it mildly). When confronted with this fact, "scientists" created a new theory called punctuated equilibrium. what a house of cards..

Right because science just wants to ruin the fun and imaginations of young children - that's its only function, right?

Re: Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

#302

Post by junon »

throwaway69123 wrote: post #212
tw04 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This will probably be downvoted but the reality is it's because there's a ton of new money in China where they're still valuing things like Ivory culturally. There's no cultural stigma at this point. The government has banned it but the black market trade is still strong. See shark fin soup as another example.

Also if you buy the offical story of Covid it is this desire for exotic expensive animals with questionable natural medical benefits that caused the zootopic jump of Covid from bats to humans. So the real cost of this sort of trade now couldnt be higher.

Most virologists buy what you call the "official story", for what it's worth.

Re: Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

#303

Post by [deleted] »

AtNightWeCode wrote: post #162
Jyaif wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there was a deadly virus that killed human that do not have blue eyes, the entire human population would "evolve" to having blue eyes very quickly. This is exactly what happened with the tusk-less elephants.

Some eye colors are dominant. We still have a lot of different eye colors.

[deleted]

Re: Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

#304

Post by max_ »

mysterydip wrote: post #53

What if unicorns at one point existed, but were hunted for the superstitious power of their horns, leaving only the hornless to reproduce and eventually eliminate the gene? How would we know?

There is anthropological work claiming that unicorns were actually a mis-depiction of the single horn rhinoceros.

Re: Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

#305

Post by max_ »

bogwog wrote: post #6

> Researchers found the number of tuskless female elephants in Mozambique increased by almost double over 30 years. This overlaps with a period of civil conflict, where armed forces slaughtered 90% of the elephant population to produce ivory. This ivory went on to finance the conflict. People suck.

The good thing is that humanity's days are numbered.

All the planet needs is the short incoming fever.

Re: Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

#306

Post by anonu »

Is this how evolution works? The article implies a cause and effect. But i always thought genetic variation was random and if that variation conferred some advantage in the world, it would dominate over many 1000s of years.

Also, i imagine elephants have long gestation periods and live longer than say your average single cell organism. Meaning the "evolution cycle" if you will, is much more drawn out..

Re: Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

#307

Post by maxerickson »

ddlsmurf wrote: post #248
maxerickson wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a consequence intended by ivory poachers.

Alright, eugenics wasn't the right word. But still this isn't evolution in the same way getting a medical intervention isn't. If you want to include everything we do as part of evolution, which is a defensible position, then all murders would be natural, this is not a practical perspective for a society.

What implications does murder being natural carry?

For instance, most responses to murder are natural in exactly the same sense that murder is natural. Things like a legal system and imprisonment are sophisticated group responses to murder, but they aren't somehow separate from our nature because of that, they are part of it.

Re: Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

#308

Post by juki »

gwerbret wrote: post #254
jsnell wrote: post #12

In case anyone is wondering about the size of the effect, https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/wildlife-... has the numbers. Before the war, 2-4% of female elephants were tuskless. Now 32% of newly born ones are. So it's a significant change, but it's not like this property was coming out of nowhere. It started off about as common as humans having green eyes.

The first figure of the paper they reference [0] has the numbers for this study: -- 18.5% of females were tuskless before the war -- 50.9% of females were tuskless after the war -- 33% of females were tuskless in the first post-war generation Of the offspring: -- 8.7% of females born to two-tusked females were two-tusked -- 44.7% of females born to tuskless females were tuskless [0]: https://www.science.org/doi/10.11…

> -- 8.7% of females born to two-tusked females were two-tusked

... were tuskless, you mean?

Re: Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

#309

Post by Jyaif »

AtNightWeCode wrote: post #162
Jyaif wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If there was a deadly virus that killed human that do not have blue eyes, the entire human population would "evolve" to having blue eyes very quickly. This is exactly what happened with the tusk-less elephants.

Some eye colors are dominant. We still have a lot of different eye colors.

Yes, that's why in my example I chose to keep alive only the most recessive eye color (both brown and green dominate blue).

Re: Female African elephants are evolving without tusks due to ivory poaching

#310

Post by gwerbret »

juki wrote: post #308
gwerbret wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first figure of the paper they reference [0] has the numbers for this study: -- 18.5% of females were tuskless before the war -- 50.9% of females were tuskless after the war -- 33% of females were tuskless in the first post-war generation Of the offspring: -- 8.7% of females born to two-tusked females were two-tusked -- 44.7% of females born to tuskless females were tuskless [0]: https://www.science.org/doi/10.11…

> -- 8.7% of females born to two-tusked females were two-tusked ... were tuskless, you mean?

Yes, sorry!
Post reply on HN