Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over

successive generations.[1][2] These characteristics are the expressions of genes that are passed on
from parent to offspring during reproduction. Different characteristics tend to exist within any given
population as a result of mutation, genetic recombination and other sources of genetic
variation.[3] Evolution occurs when evolutionary processes such as natural selection (including sexual
selection) and genetic drift act on this variation, resulting in certain characteristics becoming more
common or rare within a population.[4] It is this process of evolution that has given rise
to biodiversity at every level of biological organisation, including the levels of species,
individual organisms and molecules.[5][6]
The scientific theory of evolution by natural selection was conceived independently by Charles
Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace in the mid-19th century and was set out in detail in Darwin's
book On the Origin of Species (1859).[7] Evolution by natural selection was first demonstrated by the
observation that more offspring are often produced than can possibly survive. This is followed by
three observable facts about living organisms: (1) traits vary among individuals with respect to their
morphology, physiology and behaviour (phenotypic variation), (2) different traits confer different rates
of survival and reproduction (differential fitness) and (3) traits can be passed from generation to
generation (heritability of fitness).[8] Thus, in successive generations members of a population are
more likely to be replaced by the progenies of parents with favourable characteristics that have
enabled them to survive and reproduce in their respective environments. In the early 20th century,
other competing ideas of evolution such as mutationism and orthogenesis were refuted as
the modern synthesis reconciled Darwinian evolution with classical genetics, which
established adaptive evolution as being caused by natural selection acting on Mendelian genetic
variation.[9]
All life on Earth shares a last universal common ancestor (LUCA)[10][11][12] that lived approximately 3.5–
3.8 billion years ago.[13] The fossil record includes a progression from
early biogenic graphite,[14] to microbial mat fossils,[15][16][17] to fossilised multicellular organisms. Existing
patterns of biodiversity have been shaped by repeated formations of new species (speciation),
changes within species (anagenesis) and loss of species (extinction) throughout the evolutionary
history of life on Earth.[18] Morphological and biochemical traits are more similar among species that
share a more recent common ancestor, and can be used to reconstruct phylogenetic trees.[19][20]
Evolutionary biologists have continued to study various aspects of evolution by forming and
testing hypotheses as well as constructing theories based on evidence from the field or laboratory
and on data generated by the methods of mathematical and theoretical biology. Their discoveries
have influenced not just the development of biology but numerous other scientific and industrial
fields, including agriculture, medicine and computer science.[21]

Hint of Evolution from Comparative Anatomy

Convergence is an increase in similarities among species derived from
different ancestors as a result of similar adaptation to similar environment.
Another hint of evolutionary concept is from the comparative anatomy.
Structures from different species which have similar internal framework,
position, and embryonic development are considered
to be homologous.
So the greater the similarity in amino acid sequence, the closer the
relationship of the organisms. The organisms which are similar in structure
and also possess similarity at the biochemical level could probably have a
common ancestor.
Thank you!
From limbs of man, cat, horse, bat, whales, and other mammals are made up
of some kinds of bones, they just vary only in size and function differently.
Examples are wings of birds, bats, and insects that have the same function
different in origin.
In convergent evolution, analogous structures of unrelated organisms from
different ancestors develop similar function such as butterfly wings and bird
wings.
Fossil records, anatomical structures and embryonic development can be
used to study the relationship of organisms. Another evidence of evolution is
provided by the biochemical analysis and amino acid sequence of the
organisms' DNA.
Divergent evolution is the splitting of an ancestral population into two or more
subpopulations that are geographically
isolated from
one another.
The presence of homologous structures is a strong indicator that the
organisms evolved from common ancestors. This type of evolution is called
divergent evolution.
Studies show that species that are closely related exhibit similar embryonic
development. Even when in the adult stage,
the organisms
are quite
different.
Evidence from Embryonic Development
Here are some example of homologous structures: forelimbs of dog, bird,
lizard, and whale, which are structurally the same, but functionally different.
Homologous structures may perform different functions in the species living in
the different environment, or it may have the same origin but different
functions.
An embryo is an early stage of development in organisms. Embryonic
development include stages such as blastula, gastrula, and organogenesis.
The embryo of fishes, salamanders, lizards, birds, cats and humans are
similar during the first stage of their embryonic development, and have several
homologous structures that are not present when the organisms are adults.
Structures of unrelated species may evolve to look alike, because the
structure is adapted to similar function. These are called analogous structures.
Analogous structures have similar functions but different origin.

Homologous Structures Definition

Homologous structures are organs or skeletal elements of animals and organisms that,
by virtue of their similarity, suggest their connection to a common ancestor. These
structures do not have to look exactly the same, or have the same function. The most
important part, as hinted by their name, is that they are structurally similar.

Examples of Homologous Structures

A Tale of Tails

Monkeys, cats, rats and other mammals have tails. In mammals, the tail is an extension
of the torso, made of flexible vertebrae. Tails primarily function to ward off insects, but
they can also serve as sources of balance for more aloof species, like cats.

Humans possess a similar feature known as the coxxyx, or tailbone. Also an extension
of the torso, it is made of what some scientists call “rudimentary vertebrae” and is
thought to have once been a fully-formed tail. Unlike other mammal tails, however, it
currently serves no purpose.
The fact that the structure of the human coccyx so closely resembles that of an animal
tail gives scientists reason to link it to a common ancestor between mammals and
humans. Due to this link, the mammalian tail and the human coccyx are homologous
structures.

Eye Have a Light Bulb

Not all animals can see the way humans do.

Deep sea creatures, like the chimera, live in
an environment so dark, their eyes have not
developed the sophisticated discriminatory
skills that have, human eyes. Their visual
cues come from light receptors near the
front of their skull, and they do not see
color or depth.

Like light receptors, the human eye catches

light and sends that information to
the brain. As we humans have evolved in an environment fully illuminated by the sun,
their eyes contain extra filters, or photoreceptors, that allow us to perceive colors,
shadow, and distance. More specifically, rod-shaped photoreceptors allow us to see
black-and-white and shadow, and cone-shaped photoreceptors allow us to see color
and saturation.

The image shows a blind chimera that “sees” with light receptors.
 The image shows a human eye uses rods
and cones to convert light into images.

Thanks to evolution and environment, the

function of the human eye developed into
something far more sophisticated than that
of deep-sea creatures, like the chimera.
However, despite our ability to see full images and the chimera being restricted to only
shadow, the fact that both eyes and light receptors “see” by taking in light confirms
there possible connection to a common ancestor and, therefore, structurally
homologous.

Raise Your Head High

Giraffes are the subject of wonder and amazement, and rightly so. Since Carl Linnaeus
first classified them in 1758, these animals have captured the eye of all who explore the
Sahara.

Their long necks, especially, gather the bulk of attention. Although they measure up to
eight feet in length and weigh over 600 pounds, they contain only seven cervical
vertebrae, or neck bones. Looking at the image below, we see that these bones tend to
be longer – about one foot in length.

Analogous Structures Definition

Analogous structures are similar structures that evolved independently in two living
organisms to serve the same purpose.
The term “analogous structures” comes from the root word “analogy,” which is a device
in the English language where two different things on a basis of their similarities.

Analogous structures are examples of convergent evolution, where two organisms

separately have to solve the same evolutionary problem – such as staying hidden,
flying, swimming, or conserving water – in similar ways. The result is similar body
structures that developed independently.

In the case of analogous structures, the structures are not the same, and were not
inherited from the same ancestor. But they look similar and serve a similar purpose.

For example, the wings of an insect, bird, and bat would all be analogous structures:
they all evolved to allow flight, but they did not evolve at the same time, since insects,
birds, and mammals all evolved the ability to fly at different times.

Examples of Analogous Structures

Examples #1: Wings Through The Ages

As mentioned above, many creatures have independently developed wings. All wings
were evolved in order to solve the same problem: how to fly through the air. But they
have evolved on several different occasions throughout history.

Insects were the first organisms to evolve structures which could push air down in
order to propel their bodies through the air. Insects probably evolved flight by using
parts of their protective exoskeletons to propel themselves through the air.

Millions of years later, reptiles learned to do the same thing- pterosaurs evolved
a skin membrane, stretched between their finger and ankle bones, which was capable
of propelling them through the air.
Millions of years later still, dinosaurs separately evolved flight – using the feathers they
had developed to keep warm in order to push them into the sky. In the process, these
small, feathered dinosaurs evolved into birds.

Mammals solved the problem of flight yet again about 100 million years after birds first
appeared, with bats using a similar solution to that of the pterosaurs: skin membranes
stretched between long finger bones.

In this way, we have at least four different types of wings in the fossil record which are
analogous: they serve the same purpose, but were not inherited from the same
ancestor.

Examples #2: The “Duck-Billed” Platypus

When the first specimen of a platypus was sent to a British museum by an Australian
explorer, they tried to pry it apart to prove it was a fake! British scientists were sure
that someone had simply stuck a duck’s bill onto the body of a beaver-like animal.

However, the truth was much more interesting: platypi had evolved almost exactly the
same structure evolved by ducks to solve the problem of gathering food such as fish
and aquatic plants from water.
Ducks and platypi could not possibly be related – platypi are mammals, and they
evolved long after birds and mammals went their separate ways on the evolutionary
path. Yet both evolved very similar solutions when they moved from land back into the
water!

Examples #3: Cacti and Water Conservation

Some members of the plant genres Euphorbia and Astrophytum look extremely similar.

Both have round, ball-shaped bodies divided into eight equal wedges; both have hard,
pointy thorns sticking out in a row along the middle of each wedge, protecting them
from animals who might try to eat them. To the untrained eye, they may be mistaken
for members of the same species.

This is particularly remarkable because these two genii are only distantly related, and
they live in two completely different parts of the world.

Astrophytum evolved in North America, and all members of its genus are cacti that live
in the southwestern deserts.

Euphorbia, on the other hand, is a plant genus that includes poinsettias – as well as
certain cacti found in the deserts of Africa.

Both the African and North American cacti conserve water by minimizing their surface
area – resulting in a round, ball shape – developing a thick, waxy skin, and placing
prickly deterrents on its skin at its most vulnerable places to discourage animals from
trying to eat it for its moisture.

The result is two plants which look nearly identical – but which have very different
ancestry!
Difference Between Analogous and Homologous
Structures
The difference between homologous and analogous structures can be thought of in
terms of ancestry and function:

• Analogous structures have different ancestry, but the same function.

These can be thought of in terms of the literary device of “analogy,” where two
different things are compared based on their similarities.

• Homologous structures have the same ancestry, but may no longer serve the same
function.

For example, the bones that make up human fingers were inherited from an ancestor
that’s shared by all mammals. Bats, dogs, and whales also have these bones, but bats
use them to spread their wings, dogs walk on them, and whales do not use them for
anything since they are encased inside their fins.

These structures are therefore homologous – there is a clear relationship and

similarities between them, even though they are not used for the same purpose.

The existence of homologous structures is strong evidence for the theory of evolution,
since there is no reason why a whale should have the same bones in its fin that a bat
has in its wings, unless they both evolved from a common ancestor.

These can be thought of in terms of the literary device of “homonyms,” where two
words sound the same, but have different meanings.

Identifying Analogous Structures

Scientists usually identify analogous structures by looking at the known relatives of the
two species being studied.

If a line of common inheritance can be found – such as humans and monkeys both
having fingers, when we have a fossil record showing that humans and monkeys shared
a common ancestor, who also had fingers – the structures are not considered
analogous.

But if no common ancestor which shares these features is found – such as in the case
of bats and insects, whose shared ancestor did not fly at all – the structures would be

considered analogous. M
Divergent Evolution Definition
Divergent evolution is the process whereby groups from the same common ancestor
evolve and accumulate differences, resulting in the formation of new species.

Divergent evolution may occur as a response to changes in abiotic factors, such as a

change in environmental conditions, or when a new niche becomes available.
Alternatively, divergent evolution may take place in response to changes in biotic
factors, such as increased or decreased pressure from competition or predation.

As selective pressures are placed upon organisms, they must develop adaptive traits in
order to survive and maintain their reproductive fitness. Differences may be minor, such
as the change in shape, size or function of only one structure, or they may be more
pronounced and numerous, resulting in a completely different body structure
or phenotype.
Divergent evolution leads to speciation, and works on the basis that there is variation
within the gene pool of a population. If a reproductive barrier separates two groups
within a population, different genes controlling for various aspects of an organism’s
ability to survive and reproduce increase or decrease in frequency as gene flow is
restricted. Allopatric speciation and peripatric speciation occur when the reproductive
barrier is caused by a physical or geographical barrier, such as a river or mountain
range. Alternatively, sympatric speciation and parapatric speciation take place within
the same geographical area.

Through divergent evolution, organisms may develop homologous structures. These are
anatomically similar structures, which are present in the common ancestor and persist
within the diverged organisms, although have evolved dissimilar functions.

The image shows an example of the homologous bones found in the forelimb of four
different types of mammal.

It is generally speculated that a greater number of differences between related species

indicates more time since they underwent divergence. However, there are instances
whereby unrelated organisms independently evolve analogous structures with similar
appearance or function. This is known as convergent evolution.
Examples of Divergent Evolution
Darwin’s Finches

One of the most famous examples of divergent evolution was observed by Charles
Darwin, and documented in his book On the Origin of Species.

Upon visiting the Galapagos Islands, Darwin noted that each of the islands had a
resident population of finches belonging to the same taxonomic family. However, the
bird populations on each island differed from those on nearby islands in the shape and
size of their beaks.

Darwin suggested that each of the bird species had originally belonged to a single
common ancestor species, which had undergone modifications of its features based on
the type of food source available on each island. For example, the birds that fed on
seeds and nuts evolved large crushing beaks, while cactus eaters developed longer
beaks, and finer beaks evolved in birds that fed by picking insects out of trees.

When the ancestral form of finches initially colonized each island, each group contained
individuals who were able to better adapt to the conditions and the available food
source. These individuals survived and reproduced in their new habitat. In doing so, the
genes that controlled for certain favorable
aspects (e.g., longer beaks suitable for
accessing nectar deep inside flowers) were
spread throughout the gene pool, while
the individuals without favored features
died out. This is the process of natural
selection.
The case of ‘Darwin’s Finches’ (the birds actually belong to the tanager family and are
not true finches) is an example of adaptive radiation, which is a form of divergent
evolution.

Darwin’s finches

Adaptive radiation is a common feature in archipelagos such as the Galapagos Islands

and Hawaii, as well as on metaphorical ‘island habitats’ such as mountain ranges. This
is because gene flow between islands is limited when migration is not constant;
however, the scale of the effect depends on the dispersal ability of the organism.

ARI Convergent evolution is the independent evolution of similar

features in species of different periods or epochs in time. Convergent
evolution creates analogous structures that have similar form or function
but were not present in the last common ancestor of those groups.
The cladistic term for the same phenomenon is homoplasy. The recurrent
evolution of flight is a classic example, as flying insects, birds, pterosaurs,
and bats have independently evolved the useful capacity of flight.
Functionally similar features that have arisen through convergent evolution
are analogous, whereas homologous structures or traits have a common
origin but can have dissimilar functions. Bird, bat, and pterosaur wings are
analogous structures, but their forelimbs are homologous, sharing an
ancestral state despite serving different functions.
The opposite of convergence is divergent evolution, where related species
evolve different traits. Convergent evolution is similar to parallel evolution,
which occurs when two independent species evolve in the same direction
and thus independently acquire similar characteristics; for instance, gliding
frogs have evolved in parallel from multiple types of tree frog.
Many instances of convergent evolution are known in plants, including the
repeated development of C4 photosynthesis, seed dispersal by
fleshy fruits adapted to be eaten by animals, and carnivory.

Convergent evolution
 In evolutionary biology, convergent evolution is the process whereby organisms not
closely related (not monophyletic), independently evolve similar traits as a result of
having to adapt to similar environments or ecological niches.

The study of one type of evidence of evolution is called embryology, the study of embryos.
An embryo is an unborn (or unhatched) animal or human young in its earliest phases. Embryos
of many different kinds of animals: mammals, birds, reptiles, fish, etc. look very similar and it is
often difficult to tell them apart. Many traits of one type of animal appear in the embryo of
another type of animal. For example, fish embryos and human embryos both have gill slits. In
fish they develop into gills, but in humans they disappear before birth.

This shows that the animals are similar and that they develop similarly, implying that they are
related, have common ancestors and that they started out the same, gradually evolving different
traits, but that the basic plan for a creature's beginning remains the same.
Evolution home

The embryos of this hippo, frog, and rabbit all looked very similar in their early stages of
development.

Lamarck: The theory of transformation



SUMMARY LAMARCK: THE THEORY OF TRANSFORMATION
Though he was building on the work of his mentor, Count George-Louis Leclerc de Buffon,
Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829) is often credited with making the first large advance
toward modern evolutionary theory because he was the first to propose a mechanism by
which the gradual change of species might take place. Also, he extended the definition of
the change over time, saying that life started out simple and became more complex. In 1809
he published Philosophie Zoologique, in which he described a two part mechanism by which
change was gradually introduced into the species and passed down through generations.
His theory is alternatively referred to as the theory of transformation or simply
Lamarckism. Though today Lamarck's work is considered a major step forward, in his
lifetime he did not receive much recognition.
Use and Disuse

Figure%: Use and disuse in the evolution of the neck of the

giraffe

The classic example used to explain the concept of use and

disuse is the elongated neck of the giraffe. According to
Lamarck's theory, a given giraffe could, over a lifetime of
straining to reach high branches, develop an elongated neck. A
major downfall of his theory was that he could not explain how
this might happen, though he discussed a "natural tendency
toward perfection." Another example Lamarck used was the
toes of water birds. He proposed that from years of straining their toes to swim through
water, these birds gained elongated, webbed toes to better their swimming.

QUIZ: How Would You Die in the Romantic Era? | The SparkNotes Blog

These two examples demonstrate how use could change a trait. By the same token,
Lamarck believed that disuse would cause a trait to become reduced. The wings of
penguins, for example, would be smaller than those of other birds because penguins do not
use them to fly.

Lamarckian Inheritance
The second part of Lamarck's mechanism for evolution involved the inheritance of
acquired traits. He believed that traits changed or acquired over an individual's lifetime
could be passed down to its offspring. Giraffes that had acquired long necks would have
offspring with long necks rather than the short necks their parents were born with. This
type of inheritance, sometimes called Lamarckian inheritance, has since been disproved by
the discovery of hereditary genetics.
An extension of Lamarck's ideas of inheritance that has stood the test of time, however, is
the idea that evolutionary change takes place gradually and constantly. He studied ancient
seashells and noticed that the older they were, the simpler they appeared. From this, he
concluded that species started out simple and consistently moved toward complexity, or, as
he termed it, closer to perfection

Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by the English naturalist Charles

Darwin (1809–1882) and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through
the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete,
survive, and reproduce. Also called Darwinian theory, it originally included the broad concepts
of transmutation of species or of evolution which gained general scientific acceptance after Darwin
published On the Origin of Species in 1859, including concepts which predated Darwin's theories.
English biologist Thomas Henry Huxley coined the term Darwinism in April 1860.[1]

Terminological confusion[edit]
Darwinism subsequently referred to the specific concepts of natural selection, the Weismann barrier,
or the central dogma of molecular biology.[2] Though the term usually refers strictly to biological
evolution, creationists[who?] have appropriated it to refer to the origin of life.[citation needed] It is therefore
considered the belief and acceptance of Darwin's and of his predecessors' work, in place of other
theories, including divine design and extraterrestrial origins.[3][4]
English biologist Thomas Henry Huxley coined the term Darwinism in April 1860.[1] It was used to
describe evolutionary concepts in general, including earlier concepts published by English
philosopher Herbert Spencer. Many of the proponents of Darwinism at that time, including Huxley,
had reservations about the significance of natural selection, and Darwin himself gave credence to
what was later called Lamarckism. The strict neo-Darwinism of German evolutionary
biologist August Weismann gained few supporters in the late 19th century. During the approximate
period of the 1880s to about 1920, sometimes called "the eclipse of Darwinism", scientists proposed
various alternative evolutionary mechanisms which eventually proved untenable. The development
of the modern synthesis in the early 20th century, incorporating natural selection with population
genetics and Mendelian genetics, revived Darwinism in an updated form.[5]
While the term Darwinism has remained in use amongst the public when referring to modern
evolutionary theory, it has increasingly been argued by science writers such as Olivia
Judson and Eugenie Scott that it is an inappropriate term for modern evolutionary theory.[6][7] For
example, Darwin was unfamiliar with the work of the Moravian scientist and Augustinian friar Gregor
Mendel,[8] and as a result had only a vague and inaccurate understanding of heredity. He naturally
had no inkling of later theoretical developments and, like Mendel himself, knew nothing of genetic
drift, for example.[9][10]
In the United States, creationists often use the term "Darwinism" as a pejorative term in reference to
beliefs such as scientific materialism, but in the United Kingdom the term has no negative
connotations, being freely used as a shorthand for the body of theory dealing with evolution, and in
particular, with evolution by natural selection.[6]
Huxley and Kropotkin[edit]

As evolution became widely accepted in the 1870s, caricatures of Charles Darwin with the body of an ape or
monkey symbolised evolution.[11]

While the term Darwinism had been used previously to refer to the work of Erasmus Darwin in the
late 18th century, the term as understood today was introduced when Charles Darwin's 1859
book On the Origin of Species was reviewed by Thomas Henry Huxley in the April 1860 issue of
the Westminster Review.[12] Having hailed the book as "a veritable Whitworth gun in the armoury of
liberalism" promoting scientific naturalism over theology, and praising the usefulness of Darwin's
ideas while expressing professional reservations about Darwin's gradualism and doubting if it could
be proved that natural selection could form new species,[13] Huxley compared Darwin's achievement
to that of Nicolaus Copernicus in explaining planetary motion:
What if the orbit of Darwinism should be a little too circular? What if species should offer residual
phenomena, here and there, not explicable by natural selection? Twenty years hence naturalists
may be in a position to say whether this is, or is not, the case; but in either event they will owe the
author of "The Origin of Species" an immense debt of gratitude.... And viewed as a whole, we do not
believe that, since the publication of Von Baer's "Researches on Development," thirty years ago, any
work has appeared calculated to exert so large an influence, not only on the future of Biology, but in
extending the domination of Science over regions of thought into which she has, as yet, hardly
penetrated.[1]
These are the basic tenets of evolution by natural selection as defined by Darwin:

1. More individuals are produced each generation than can survive.

2. Phenotypic variation exists among individuals and the variation is heritable.
3. Those individuals with heritable traits better suited to the environment will survive.
4. When reproductive isolation occurs new species will form.
Another important evolutionary theorist of the same period was the Russian geographer and
prominent anarchist Peter Kropotkin who, in his book Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (1902),
advocated a conception of Darwinism counter to that of Huxley. His conception was centred around
what he saw as the widespread use of co-operation as a survival mechanism in human societies and
animals. He used biological and sociological arguments in an attempt to show that the main factor in
facilitating evolution is cooperation between individuals in free-associated societies and groups. This
was in order to counteract the conception of fierce competition as the core of evolution, which
provided a rationalization for the dominant political, economic and social theories of the time; and the
prevalent interpretations of Darwinism, such as those by Huxley, who is targeted as an opponent by
Kropotkin. Kropotkin's conception of Darwinism could be summed up by the following quote:
In the animal world we have seen that the vast majority of species live in societies, and that they find
in association the best arms for the struggle for life: understood, of course, in its wide Darwinian
sense—not as a struggle for the sheer means of existence, but as a struggle against all natural
conditions unfavourable to the species. The animal species, in which individual struggle has been
reduced to its narrowest limits, and the practice of mutual aid has attained the greatest development,
are invariably the most numerous, the most prosperous, and the most open to further progress. The
mutual protection which is obtained in this case, the possibility of attaining old age and of
accumulating experience, the higher intellectual development, and the further growth of sociable
habits, secure the maintenance of the species, its extension, and its further progressive evolution.
The unsociable species, on the contrary, are doomed to decay.[14]

— Peter Kropotkin, Mutual Aid: A Factor of Evolution (1902), Conclusion