Monday, March 1, 2010


A fascinating study was published last week in Current Biology about the relationship between the hawkmoth and the Coyote Tobacco plant, Nicotiana attenuata. N. attenuata is wild flowering plant found in the west, related but not the same as the cigarette tobacco plant grown in the south. (You may recognize it as a relative of the Nictiana plant that is a favorite perennial in New England gardens). The plant has developed - as many flowering plants have - a symbiotic relationship with its pollinator, the Hawkmoth. The moth picks up and disperses the plants pollen. The the benefit to the moth is that it frequently lays its eggs on the plant's leaves. When the eggs hatch, its larvae (the caterpillars) have their first meal - the plant itself.

This is obviously not a mutually beneficial relationship. Too many caterpillars and the tobacco plant population would begin to drop, and possibly disappear. The plant faces a choice: adapt or die.

Scientists has recently observed a startling adaptation taking place. The plant normally flowers in the evening hours during Hawkmoth high flight times. Recently, however, the tobacco plant has begun to flower during the morning, attracting a new and different pollinator: a hummingbird that has no interest in devouring its provider of nectar.

This is evolution at work. The plant has a choice in a figurative sense. It doesn't have a working brain capable of strategizing a plan for its own survival. There is something more primitive at work. Something elegant in its simplicity, and powerful in its determination: natural selection.

Natural selection, one of Darwin's main ideas in his theory of evolution is commonly thought of as "survival of the fittest". It refers to the fact that there is a great deal of variation within a population or organisms, in this case the tobacco plants. Most of the plants flowered at night and had a higher likelihood of being eaten by Hawkmoth larvae. A few plants, flowered earlier in the day. The earlier flowering plants survived, thrived, and passed their genetic code on to the subsequent generation of plants. They're the ones who had higher survival rates. The balance shifted between night flowering plants and morning flowering plants shifted towards to morning plants.

Interestingly though, the night flowering plants remain. Scientists hypothesize that the moths, which fly over a much larger territory, are superior pollinator and capable of spreading the plant's pollen to plants further away than the hummingbirds are able to.

Regardless - more and more of the tobacco plants began to flower in the early morning hours. This adaptation gave the population of tobacco plants the opportunity to recover and stablilize, ultimately strengthening this new trait that aids their survival. The species has changed. It has adapted to thwart a negative force in its environment.
In your opinion does this show proof of evolution?

37 comments:

  1. I'm not sure that this is really something about the idea of evolution. The plants are adapting to their predators, and which in return changing their time of pollenating. I think it's just natural, not something that goes along with evolution.

    Savanna Brown
    PER.3

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that it's more adaptation than it is anything else. It isn't evolution because we can't be sure that it was meant to be this way. The plant is just adapting to its surroundings.
    Shannon Mogle Per. 3

    ReplyDelete
  3. Darwins idea of evolution is straightforward and we can see it happening in these plants as they come up with better statigies to survive and pass down thier gene.
    The plants are learning and doing what their instincts tells them to do fix the problem.


    Daniel m per3

    ReplyDelete
  4. Darwin's Theory about survival of the fittest is all about adaptation. Species that are dying off must find new ways to survive. The tobacco plant is evolving in its surroundings just like many other species have done in the past. Though I'm not sure this proves that evolutions in it's full context exist, I do believe this is an example of how many species have adapted to survive.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I don't exactly think it is proving evolution, although in a way, but it definitely proves that like us, plants also adapt to survive. It's kind of cool to know that they can have that capability. It shows that we still have much more to learn
    Camden Long

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yes i do belive this is some proof of evolution because even in the case of humans the not fittest chimps didn't die off yet we evolved from them so in a way it's not survival of they fittest it's more like the fittest become more numerous

    -Calvin Clark

    ReplyDelete
  7. It's defiantly proof, something is facing a force that could wipe it out so it changes. That is the whole basis of evolution, the strongest pass down their genes because they are the ones that actually survived. like big horned sheep only breeding with the most fit male, the strongest male passes the groups strongest genes along, while the weaker ones aren't able to reproduce thus stopping the possibility of passing along any genes that are weaker.
    -River Holmes

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't think this is proving evolution. I think that, like the people above me, that this is adaptation. The plants haven't evolved over generations, which is the definition of evolution.

    -Matt Vanderpol

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think it does because the plant is changing the way is operates so it can survive. The plant started out as flowering in the night but the larvae were eating the plants therefore pushing the plant towards extinction. So the plant changed its flowering pattern to mornings and early days therefore changing its pollinator to a humming bird. I think it shows signs of evolution but that's just my opinion.

    Tyra

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think that there is proof of evolution. The plant is obiviously changing due to the threat of extinction. It is evolving to better its chances in life thus more and more plants will have the same capabilities to survive. It is simple evolution just like humans do.


    Culley Dumbeck

    ReplyDelete
  11. somebody above that said that what the huming bird does i not evolution, but then say plants adapt to survive. isnt that evolution to its fullest? but i think it is really cool what the plant and bird have done.


    yours truly alden

    ReplyDelete
  12. I would like proof of this adaptation. How would the scientists know how the plants behaved prior to their experiments. This supposed adaptation could be something that the plant have been doing for hundreds of years. This does not prove evolution. It just shows the variety of things that happen to plants. The plant doesn't have a brain, it can't make choices. Whether or not the plant survives is decided merely by chance.

    ReplyDelete
  13. seth reynolds is above

    ReplyDelete
  14. When we think of evolution, the idea of recognizing adversity and using consciousness to overcome it comes in to play. The plant as mentioned is not "alive" with a sense of right or wrong. What the plants are doing is adapting to a situation. The plant was able to recognize its adversity and use its ability of when to grow to overcome the problem directly pointing at consciousness. Therefore yes, I believe this is proof of evolution at its finest. The fact that we as humans can recognize this will also help with staying out of the way and realizing life beyond that of a human nature. It can help us see we just may NOT be the greatest thing on this planet.

    ReplyDelete
  15. In my opinion it is adapting to your environment to survive. It makes sense that you would change to your environement and live. It is something that every 'living' creature does on this planet. Over time a change to be the fittest 'living' creature you could be is evolution.

    Mike Krause

    ReplyDelete
  16. I believe this is an exapmle of a species changing in order to survive. They want to survive and pass on the strongest genes through natural selection. All species including humans adapt when put in new surroundings. I don't believe this necessarily proves the theory of evolution, but it is definitely an example of adaptation and natural selection.

    Rachel Per 4

    ReplyDelete
  17. Whether this is evolution or not is a difficult question to answer. Yes it has changed it's time but it is also proven that they can still survive with their old habits so there is no real need to adapt to different circumstances.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I believe this is more of an adapatation to survive than evolution because all organisms have to adapt according to there surrondings in able to survive so i wouldn't say that it is evolution yet but it could become evolution.

    Alex Stork

    ReplyDelete
  19. "The earlier flowering plants survived, thrived, and passed their genetic code on to the subsequent generation of plants." The plant is changing to survive, and passing down the genetic code. I think it's evolution.

    Kalena Pinkston

    ReplyDelete
  20. In consideration of its surroundings, I believe that this is a form of revolution-many think that it can be seen as a method of adaptation and/or a survival instinct, but fail to recognize that the environment has these responses through an evolutionary cycle. I believe, in time , we'll see this plant become more adaptive to other forms of life in it's region, providing a better understanding of whether or not this is evolution.

    Andrew Stork Period 4

    ReplyDelete
  21. Despite the fact that the plant is barely sentient, it was able to distinguish a problem, correct it, and thrive. This by itself seems to prove that it is indeed evolution. It wasn't so much as a freak gene that suddenly gave it a one up on all other plants, so much as simple adaptation required to continue its existence.

    John Emmett Per. 3

    ReplyDelete
  22. LOLZ I BLOG <3 :-]

    ReplyDelete
  23. Adaptations and evolution go hand in hand. The people above so coinly are using the distinction that adaptation is differentiated from evolution when in fact is evolution not the succes of an organism possessing an adaptation that enables its survival? All Im saying is that they arent two seperate classes but actually should be considered equally relevant when we talk in terms of evolution.

    With all regards, Eric Devall.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I don't think this is proving evolution at all. I think that , that this is adaptation. The plants haven't evolved over any generation. and plants are adapting to survive
    Victoria B

    ReplyDelete
  25. I believe that this adaptation to survive is actually evolution in the making. It is survival of the fittest. In order to survive they need to keep adapting to things such as this. I'm with Eric! All of these other people are trying to say that adapting and evolution are two completely different things.

    Joshua Luce

    ReplyDelete
  26. I think the plants uses what it needs to adapt to their surorundings.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Yes i think it is part of evolution, granted that it might have done it in another way but i think that what the bird did for the plant is amazing for science and research to see that a bird could speed up the process for the tabacco plant for its reproduction. This is very interesting to me because i didn't know that a birdcould help so much with the plants reproduction.
    Jake Whisler

    ReplyDelete
  28. Ridrigo-

    i think it ia prof of evolution. i personally belive evolution is real. even without this articles imput but i do belive it gives more prof to a theroy that should be fact.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I think that this is an example of evolution at work. The flowers are changing to avoid the humming birds, in order to survive. They have obviously evolved by natural selection to persevere.

    Riley Kemp

    ReplyDelete
  30. I think that this does show proof of evolution, they adapted to survive. The article seems to tell it all, with proof to back "the survival of the fittest" theory. the morning tobacco plants no longer have a common predator.

    Nicole Pritchard

    ReplyDelete
  31. I believe that natural selection is simply a part of life, there's no reason for anybody to speak out against it when there's plenty of proof for it. It's not radical or extremely out of the picture either. Natural selection is a simple concept that I believe is often discredited because of its association with Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution. I think people should be less ignorant and open their eyes to the ACTUAL concept of natural selection and that it's just a part of life that if their eyes were open, could see happening every day.

    Kylan Berger

    ReplyDelete
  32. I don't think that this is completely evolution. The plants are changing, but not enough to be considered a different plant. I think they are just adjusting to deal with things like every other living thing on earth. But this does show us that there is so much more that we could and probably need to still learn.

    Tori

    ReplyDelete
  33. I believe that the plants are experiencing evolution and its obvious that they are to avoid complete destruction from the other animals it shares bonds with

    Alex T (Slag)

    ReplyDelete
  34. I think this is one of many situations that demonstrate how evolution is and has always constantly changed species. I believe that there's no reason for anybody to speak out against evolution when there's plenty of proof for it.

    Dezmond Pardon

    ReplyDelete
  35. I think if the plant completely changed in shape, color, height or anything else that would be more of evolution. It seems more like more adaption (which is pretty much a step below evolution) the plants are just changing so that they can survive better.

    B. Gann

    ReplyDelete
  36. I don't think that it is evolution because all plants have to adapt to their enviroment somehow. It may not be evolution now, but naybe later on it will be. We still have so much to learn about it.

    Mariah Carson. :D

    ReplyDelete
  37. I believe things evolve due to their need to adapt. Plants and animals, in order to survive, must adapt to their habitats. This entry does give evidence of evolution.

    Teresa Xayavong ^.^

    ReplyDelete