randy@utcsrgv.UUCP (Randall S. Becker) (05/02/84)
> Isn't there a rare recessive gene for webbed fingers and toes? > Dan Breslau > ...ihnp4!crsp!gargoyle!dan May I point out that according to the "generally accepted" paths but which humans evolved, there did exist a period of human evolution which was spent under water. We (and I use the term loosely) were not of the homo sapien species at that time however; rather we resembled something like a fish, as am example. To my knowledge, genes don't just vanish, except in the case of mutation. Have a look as some photographs of the embryonic phases of most mammals and fishes (and birds, and ...) and note the striking similarities. Note also that there is probably a "rare recessive gene" for gill slits! (not :-) ) -- Randall S. Becker Usenet: {dalcs,dciem,garfield,musocs,qucis,sask,titan, trigraph,ubc-vision,utzoo,watmath,allegra,cornell, decvax,decwrl,ihnp4,uw-beaver}!utcsrgv!randy CSNET: randy@Toronto ARPA: randy%Toronto@CSNet-Relay
dan@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP (Dan Breslau) (05/04/84)
>> Isn't there a rare recessive gene for webbed fingers and toes? >> Dan Breslau ...ihnp4!crsp!gargoyle!dan > May I point out that according to the "generally accepted" paths but > which humans evolved, there did exist a period of human evolution > which was spent under water. We (and I use the term loosely) were > not of the homo sapien species at that time however; rather we > resembled something like a fish, as am example. To my knowledge, > genes don't just vanish, except in the case of mutation. Have a look > as some photographs of the embryonic phases of most mammals and > fishes (and birds, and ...) and note the striking similarities. Note > also that there is probably a "rare recessive gene" for gill slits! > (not :-) ) Yes, of course. "Oncogeny recapitulates phylogeny." First of all, yes, genes *do* vanish from a species -- especially if they're dominant, and a hinderance to survival. That's basic Darwinism. If they're recessive, they may disappear, or simply become very rare. I strongly doubt that any there is a gene left for gill slits in humans -- past the embyronic stage -- because such a gene is a negative survival trait. Nor do any humans lay eggs, although our distant ancestors in the sea did. I was simply suggesting that this trait (webbing in fingers and toes) could have evolved during the (relatively recent) aquatic stage. I actually consider it more likely than that the gene is a holdover from an even more remote time. Dan Breslau ...ihnp4!crsp!gargoyle!dan
hardie@uf-csg.UUCP (Peter T Hardie [stdnt]) (11/02/84)
there was an article in a magazine (perhaps Science or Discover, I don't remember) that postulated an aquatic/amphibious ape in Man's ancestry. It based this on the pattern of hair on the body, which is arranged in a sort of flow pattern along the arms and other areas. The author(s) suggested that a pre-homonid ape developed a semi-aquatic lifestyle, possibly in a way similar to that of the Japanese macques. -- Pete Hardie, Univ. of Florida, CIS Gould username: hardie