Can't wait for the first Furry Liberation movement to take hold and campaign for their future kids to grow tails.
Scientists have traced human tail loss to a short sequence of genetic code
151–160 of 247 posts
Re: Scientists have traced human tail loss to a short sequence of genetic code
#152Can't wait for the first Furry Liberation movement to take hold and campaign for their future kids to grow tails.
The decision to modify an embryo to have cat ears and a tail is a decision between doctor and parent!
As long as you get a doctor involved, no modification is too horrific.
Re: Scientists have traced human tail loss to a short sequence of genetic code
#153It takes metabolic resources to grow a tail. If the benefit was less than the cost, mutations that prevented the tail from growing were selected for.
And they're unhygenic. Sheep farmers for instance routinely cut the tails of their flock because it is difficult to shear and becomes a breeding ground for blowfly larvae. That said, i saw a movie called Shallow Hal(2001) which had a scene in which a man was shown to have a tail. Now it may have been cgi, but it made me think that there must be a minority of humans with that mutation.
but it made me think that there must be a minority of humans with that mutation
There certainly are, but it is extremely rare: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tail#Human_tails
Re: Scientists have traced human tail loss to a short sequence of genetic code
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hair is much worse in that regard, as the tail would be positioned too low to practically grab (it would asking for a knee to the face or punches to the back of the head or spine if you tried). I think the driver is more likely to be bipedality. A tail doesn't provide a lot of benefit for balance or rearside whisker utility when moving on two legs, and would interfere with sitting and lying postures. I think humans a…
>and would interfere with sitting and lying postures. I think that assumes that a hypothetical modern human tail would still be attached to the spine. A tail structure attached to the main body only through soft tissues could be flexible enough at the root to not be an issue.
The tail is just the end of the spine. I think it would be extremly difficult to evolve one that is not connected.
Re: Scientists have traced human tail loss to a short sequence of genetic code
#155Link to the open access article : https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-07095-8
If you scroll to the bottom check out how long this article went into peer review: almost 3 years!
Three years can get you a PhD in UK.
Received 14 September 2021
Accepted 19 January 2024
Published 28 February 2024
Re: Scientists have traced human tail loss to a short sequence of genetic code
#156I’d really enjoy a prehensile tail, despite the adaptations required for trousers and chairs. Also, I was enough a nerd growing up that other kids would have pulled it.
i suspect there would be adaptations to a variety of other things like sleep, bipedal locomotion, defecation, etc.
I suspect our tailed ancestors slept, locomoted, and defecated.
Re: Scientists have traced human tail loss to a short sequence of genetic code
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
and then, crispr cat ears
Not the bombardier beetle's hydrogen peroxide cannon? I'll never understand furries.
I mean, do you want Zootopia, or do you want that weird (strangely enjoyable) Jamie Foxx Netflix movie? Because one might be mundane, but at least you don't have to worry about some guy blowing you across the block with his shrimp powers.
Re: Scientists have traced human tail loss to a short sequence of genetic code
#158time to bring it back then, alongside horn implants, and third tit.
Third nipples are quite common believe it or not. Most people with them believe they’re moles.
Re: Scientists have traced human tail loss to a short sequence of genetic code
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
The tail seems like vestigial anatomy (originally useful in fish) that has three possible states in mammals: 1. Repurposed for a new function (tree swinging, signals) 2. Not much used but still in the repo (mice) 3. Garbage collected (apes).
I'm curious about the "garbage collected" theory as there doesn't seem like a lot of selection pressure to remove tails simply due to them not being useful and consuming energy to grow. The appendix is a far more likely candidate for garbage collection as it has no obvious function and can easily cause death if it bursts. I suspect that there's another reason that apes lost their tails - most likely related to walkin…
In that study the tail was not innervated so there would be no way to voluntarily move the tail out of the way when sitting.
Re: Scientists have traced human tail loss to a short sequence of genetic code
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
>and would interfere with sitting and lying postures. I think that assumes that a hypothetical modern human tail would still be attached to the spine. A tail structure attached to the main body only through soft tissues could be flexible enough at the root to not be an issue.
The tail is just the end of the spine. I think it would be extremly difficult to evolve one that is not connected.
I imagine it would involve taking the one that is connected and evolving one that isn't (slow selection for a smaller connecting vertebra until it becomes vestigial). Floating bones aren't uncommon (you have one in your neck); the real wrench is that it's usually for entirely vestigial limbs, not vestigial portions of functional limbs. But I'm sure life could uh find a way.