Why have ants barely changed?

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2003-06-19 09:14pm

From This page

So why have they not changed much, if at all?

Any thoughts on the matter?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-06-19 09:19pm

Because they've managed to carve out a niche for themselves for which they are perfectly suited for survival. The horseshoe crab is similar in this regard, and has remained the same for even longer.

Enforcer Talen · Post by **Enforcer Talen** » 2003-06-19 09:21pm

why change when you dont have to?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-06-19 09:23pm

Indeed, I remember reading this in New Scientist ages ago. The soldier ants are simply so damn good at what they do that they don't need to evolve any better. I believe it is a species of ant that has a single colony that is a third of the size of Europe near enough.

Evolution is like that, like parasitism which is the most successful method of living always crops up (symbiosis in other cases).

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2003-06-19 09:26pm

So in ant society...do they recognise mutation at all, and destroy the mutant ant at all?

I remember something about ants being really vicious little buggers about ants that vary from their norm, so has this safeguarded against unwarranted evolution too?

SirNitram · Post by **SirNitram** » 2003-06-19 09:48pm

Rye wrote:So in ant society...do they recognise mutation at all, and destroy the mutant ant at all?

I remember something about ants being really vicious little buggers about ants that vary from their norm, so has this safeguarded against unwarranted evolution too?

I've never heard of any such behavior, so it'd be a bit silly to say it's happening.

Their niche is perfect the way they are. With no driving force weeding out the weak and selecting the strong mutantations, there is no true improvements.

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2003-06-19 10:06pm

The mutations that happen usually aren't that good for ants, and even if they are they would have a LOT of already very successful competition from other populations of ants.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-06-19 10:10pm

Everyone is mutated. The only question is whether the environmental factors change enough to shift the range of optimal mutations far enough away to produce significant structural changes.

Movies like X-men ask us how we would feel if we were mutants. However, their science is shit. We are ALL mutants. There is no such thing as a non-mutated human; it's called genetic variation, people.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-06-19 10:12pm

The biggest problem with X-Men is that it takes the science a bit too seriously. The movie seems to be serious about the whole "evolution leaps forward!" bullshit.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2003-06-19 10:13pm

Ants are people? I've lost the plot I'm afraid, i have to go to bed.

Kuroneko · Post by **Kuroneko** » 2003-06-19 10:14pm

Rye wrote:Ants are people? I've lost the plot I'm afraid, i have to go to bed.

No, but the same principles apply as far mutation and evolution go.

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-06-19 10:28pm

It's the same reason crocs and turtles haven't changed. There are always mutations, but in a species which is almost perfectly suited for its niche, almost any significant mutation will be detrimental and selected against. If anything ever happened to the environment that suddenly made ant strategy unsuccessful, you'd probably see very rapid evolution as old traits become liabilities and certain new ones become useful, even necessary, for survival.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-06-19 10:31pm

Don't mess with success.

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2003-06-19 11:09pm

Scorpions are vitually unchanged as well. They are well suited for survival, just like ants.

Tasoth · Post by **Tasoth** » 2003-06-19 11:30pm

I think in general most arthropods haven't really changed since they started to diverge into the different groups. They've specialized and become the best of what they are.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-06-19 11:36pm

Nothing seems to be forcing them to change or die. And so the changes that are occurring haven't done anything to make them not "ants" to our eyes.

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2003-06-19 11:48pm

True. We humans cannot conquer the ants either. Ants are like Borg. They work as a collective.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-06-19 11:55pm

Superman wrote:True. We humans cannot conquer the ants either. Ants are like Borg. They work as a collective.

And not those pansy Voyager Borg neither.

Superman · Post by **Superman** » 2003-06-19 11:57pm

HAHAHA Neo! Exactly!

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2003-06-20 09:47am

Rye wrote:From This page

So why have they not changed much, if at all?

Any thoughts on the matter?

Not that I've read the article, but ants have been around for a long time because they're successful. The design works well and remains adaptable.

Besides, just noting that there are hundreds of species of ants should tell you that ants do change. Ants are also closely related to wasps, so their common ancestors went in at least two substantially different directions.

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2003-06-20 10:04am

Darth Wong wrote:Movies like X-men ask us how we would feel if we were mutants. However, their science is shit. We are ALL mutants. There is no such thing as a non-mutated human; it's called genetic variation, people.

The X-Men is an abstract of basic human oppression of those who are different.
They are constantly fighting for their right to exist, just as jews had to in WWII, and just as blacks had to in the US and in South Africa. They were catagorized and studied as animals and not as human beings. X men looks at people who see that same process in motion and try to stop it.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2003-06-20 04:42pm

All this is pretty much what i thought anyway :/.

Acacia · Post by **Acacia** » 2003-06-20 05:05pm

Have there been any studies removing certain types of ants from their usual environment to another to see if any significant mutations would occur and how fast they would implement?

Kuroneko · Post by **Kuroneko** » 2003-06-20 06:12pm

Acacia wrote:Have there been any studies removing certain types of ants from their usual environment to another to see if any significant mutations would occur and how fast they would implement?

I don't think the time-scale involved would make it a very feasible experiment.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-06-20 07:11pm

Acacia wrote:Have there been any studies removing certain types of ants from their usual environment to another to see if any significant mutations would occur and how fast they would implement?

Considering that you can do the same type of thing with bacteria, what's the point of doing it with ants? Too much trouble.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Why have ants barely changed?

Why have ants barely changed?

Re: Why have ants barely changed?