Human Limbs Evolved From Shark Fins Thanks To Sonic Hedgehog Gene (mirror.co.uk) 95
An anonymous reader shares a report at Mirror: Scientists believe human limbs evolved from the gills of sharks -- thanks to a gene named after Sonic the Hedgehog. The discovery comes from analysis of skate, a cartilaginous fish which has much in common with sharks. Limbs, like gills, grow thanks to a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog gene' -- named after the video game character. The new discovery backs up a theory suggested 138 years ago that legs and arms evolved from prehistoric fish gills. Gizmodo has more details on this.
a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog gene' (Score:3)
Re:a vital protein known as the 'Sonic hedgehog ge (Score:5, Funny)
FFS. Just no. NO.
At least this discovery wasn't made aboard the research vessel Boaty McBoatFace.
Re: (Score:3)
You're just jealous because you didn't get to name it the Q*bert gene.
@!#?@!
Re: (Score:1)
FFS. Just no. NO.
Well, you do go faster on land with legs than if you don't have any. Right?
Re: (Score:3)
FFS. Just no. NO.
Yep!
Someone discovered a gene and called it "hedgehog" because it made fly larvae look like mini hedgehogs. Then someone discovered another variety and the form X hedgehog was born. Then someone who grew up in the 80s found a variety and thought it would be a good wheeze to make X=Sonic.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
good point!
There's an obesity gene named after McDonalds (Score:2)
No I just made that up. But San Francisco voters did try to name a sewage treatment plant after GWB.
What gene would you name after trump?
Re: (Score:2)
Sonic the Hedgehog Hair gene
Re: (Score:2)
Do you not understand how Slashdot functions? USERS submit stories from other sites, the submissions are upvoted, and eventually brought to the front page. If you think something else should be on Slashdot's homepage, SUBMIT IT.
https://slashdot.org/submissio... [slashdot.org]
it's not April First any more, guys. (Score:2)
stop posting beer talk.
Re: (Score:2)
Bony fish did not evolve from sharks (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
And ultimately, the limbs arose as a modification of the fins on lobe-finned fish.
I looked up "sonic the hedgehog" gene and didn't find too many scholarly articles on that particular gene. Nor did I find any "Spiny Norman" gene, nor in fact any hedgehog references to any genes.
Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks (Score:4, Informative)
That's because it's sonic hedgehog, not sonic THE hedgehog.
Many references:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re:Bony fish did not evolve from sharks (Score:5, Informative)
"evolved from SHARK fins" is a journalistic invention from mirror.co and is not the fault of the cited article, which says "evolved from the transformation of gill arches in early fish", clearly including common ancestors. It is perfectly plausible that the same gene may have descended in recognizable form down these not very widely separated branches of the evolutionary tree, that is certainly true of many other genes. What other means do we have to learn something about genes of the vanished common parent, other than studying the similarities and differences of current expression and function of recognizable descendents in dissimilar species?
Anyway, the research is about gills, not fins, so that is another journalistic crime from mirror.co. It would have been more honest to run a headline along the lines that shark gills and human hands are essentially the same, but then would anybody read it?
Re: (Score:1)
The headline writers are the sharks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Anyway, the research is about gills, not fins, so that is another journalistic crime from mirror.co. It would have been more honest to run a headline along the lines that shark gills and human hands are essentially the same, but then would anybody read it?
Not really, if anyone were interested they'd probably already seen the segment on Attenborough's "Rise of the Animals [youtu.be]". Besides, you can't expect much in the way of science reporting from the Mirror.
Re: (Score:2)
Title doesn't reflect article (Score:5, Informative)
And duplicated as well (Score:2)
RTFA: from gills, not from fins.
Furthermore, IIRC, the developing human foetus has gills in addition to limbs [berkeley.edu].
So the gill that developed into a limb was *duplicated* in subsequent evolutionary models.
I dunno - a feature morphing into another feature by natural selection seems reasonable, but a feature duplicated sounds like a stretch.
Any evolution experts care to comment?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Title doesn't reflect article (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The mirror.co.uk article does say "shark fins" in the title, so the poster was just knee-jerking TFA. The Gizmodo article is more rational on the subject; the article on mirror.co.uk is crammed full of sensationalism, like the "scientists believe" phrase at the start of the post, which implies that it's a widely- or universally-held belief, while the Gizmodo article states "Now scientists at the University of Cambridge have performed experiments on the embryos of skates that point to a possible evolutionary
Re: (Score:2)
And skates, not sharks. And "are related to" not "evolved from". I understand why a rag like mirror hacked up that headline, but why did a Slashdot editor uncritically promulgate that journalistic slime? The research is fascinating enough without the outright lies.
Bad summary (Score:5, Informative)
A very bad summary. That's what they get for using the Daily Mirror as if anything they published were actually science journalism.
The proposed evolution is from gills, not from fins. And even here, it's the gill arch: not the gills, but the cartilage supporting the gills
Sharks have nothing to do with it-- the fish in question are skates, not sharks, and even here, they aren't proposing that limbs evolved from skate gill arches, but from the gill arches of proto-fishes who were ancestral to both.
Re:Bad summary Sharks have nothing to do with it-- (Score:2)
They weren't proto fishes back then, they were full fishes. Fishes go all the way down to the craniates which have no spine, only a skull (hagfish), and including the jawless fish (of which lampreys remain). The jawed fishes were full fish before the cartilaginout/bony split.
Re: (Score:1)
Related to earlier article? (Score:1)
Hang on, I was just reading an earlier article about bogus, nonsense books on Kindle. Is this an example of one?
Of course (Score:1)
This is why we see so many aquatic creatures swimming around with partial arms and legs dangling off of them while in transition. The evidence is so overwhelming, we must believe it. BELIEVE!
Laser Implants (Score:5, Funny)
So we should all start looking into getting laser implants?
Re: (Score:3)
shark's teeth (Score:2)
evolved into Mackie's knife, eh?
I'm sure Rudyard Kipling... (Score:2)
That explains it (Score:2)
uh (Score:1)
Circle of Life (Score:5, Funny)
Gills evolve into arms.
Arms evolve into man.
Man invents laser.
Shark gets laser on head.
Re: (Score:2)
Uh... Burma Shave?
Re: (Score:2)
This is pushing further back than lobe finned fish from what I can gather. Lobe finned fish weren't the first tetrapods.
No They Didn't. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Sharknado 4 plot? (Score:2)
Is this part of the Sharknado 4 plot?
138 years ago? (Score:2)
Whoa, you mean the creationists were right?
Re: (Score:3)
The theory is what was suggested 138 years ago. It wasn't suggested the evolutionary change itself occurred then.
Don't worry. I had to read that part twice, too.
Re: (Score:1)
FTFY
Re: (Score:1)
"The new discovery backs up a theory, suggested 138 years ago, that legs and arms evolved from prehistoric fish gills."
See?
Re: (Score:2)
Make sure you file that comment with the submitter. I, on the other hand, know how to use commas.
Thanks To Sonic The Hedgehog Game (Score:2)
Did anyone else read that as "Human Limbs Evolved From Shark Fins Thanks To Sonic The Hedgehog Game" at first? I was trying to figure out how playing the Sega game would change shark fins into human limbs...
A corrections is needed - about 138 million (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think the theory was suggested 138 million years ago.
Re: (Score:1)
Jesus, try being a bit wronger, why don't you? (Score:3)
Human Limbs Evolved From Shark Fins
Scientists believe human limbs evolved from the gills of sharks
Fins, gills, same thing right?
Second thing: we're not descended from sharks.
"Science" "Journalism" (Score:1)