You could probably start with the endangered species list. Those are just the ones we find useful or cute enough to concern ourselves with but a good number of them are failing to thrive in their current environment, ergo, endangered.
Unlikely because it already selected for enough intelligence that we adapt our environment to suit us pretty effectively. Until we can’t do that there wouldn’t be a selection pressure for humanity to change. Even then it would take a long time, rapid change is more likely to lead to extinction for many species with a smaller number able to adapt quick enough, or already suited to the new environment enough not to die out.
Mainly due to the encroachment of man.Techno2000:
You could probably start with the endangered species list. Those are just the ones we find useful or cute enough to concern ourselves with but a good number of them are failing to thrive in their current environment, ergo, endangered.
Yes, the addition of a new predator or a change to the landscape for any number of reasons (volcano, flood, strip mall) is a change in the environment.
An environment change wouldn’t just affect one organism… it would affect the whole ecosystem that the organism is connected to.Techno2000:
Yes, the addition of a new predator or a change to the landscape for any number of reasons (volcano, flood, strip mall) is a change in the environment.
Why do you think humanity moving into an area only affects one organism?
Sorry, I mean environment changes in general…like becoming too cold, hot and dry etc.Techno2000:
Why do you think humanity moving into an area only affects one organism?
“Too cold” for one animal isn’t necessary too cold for another. They’d all be affected but not equally. Some would likely die, some would likely leave, some would stay and generations later you’d likely find that any traits they had that would help them survive are more pronounced as those with that trait survived more easily. Some might thrive in the cold environment right away.
If the Amazon ecosystem was subjected to a slow cold climate change (as cold Canada )would evolution be able to morph those plants and animals into fit cold tolerant creatures?Techno2000:
“Too cold” for one animal isn’t necessary too cold for another. They’d all be affected but not equally. Some would likely die, some would likely leave, some would stay and generations later you’d likely find that any traits they had that would help them survive are more pronounced as those with that trait survived more easily. Some might thrive in the cold environment right away.
It’s no different when humanity moves into an area and disrupts things. If we drive the wolves out of an area that changes the balance, an animal that previously might have benefited more from speed to evade the wolves may no longer have that pressure. That animal might be considered more fit for the environment after the change, the wolves were less fit and forced to leave or die.
Either way, endangered species (along with the huge number of species who’ve died out throughout history) are animals not well suited for their current environment.
Which ones?
Vague…Please be more specific.
How lucky are you if the whole ecosystem you depend on didn’t get the lucky lottery ticket?
My problem is that macroevolution supposedly takes millions of years for anything to evolve. How can that benefit an organism when it has to be fit at the same time the environmental change comes along?