It is hard to speak of evolution without inadvertently attributing to it intent. I might say, ‘beetles evolved to fly’, which sounds like the beetles had a choice in the matter. Of course they didn’t. Or I might say, ‘evolution guides us’, or ‘evolution wants us’. No, evolution can’t guide us or want us to do anything; it’s not a sentient entity, it’s a process.
We use these expressions because they are convenient shortcuts to refer to the process of natural selection.
Here are three quick (and basic) examples to explain how natural selection works: Let’s say a camel is born with genes giving it a bigger hump than most other camels. Camels store fat in their humps (not water) and that fat provides them with energy when there isn’t food around. Let’s say there is a severe drought. That camel, having a larger energy supply on its back when food in the environment is scarce, is more likely to survive and pass on its genes. Over millions of years, with similar situations occurring, all camels end up with the gene and bigger humps. Natural selection has ‘guided’ a physical change.
When male giraffes fight each other for mates, they bash each other with their heads. According to Robert E Simmons and Lue Scheepers in an article in New Scientist, the ones with the bigger and more powerful necks are more likely to win the battle, get the mate, and pass on their genes. Over millions of years this results in giraffes having bigger necks. That’s another physical change ‘guided’ by the process of natural selection.
A monkey born with the propensity to break nuts and eat the kernels has an abundant food source, and is more likely to survive a drought and pass on its genes. Over time, all its descendants will have the propensity to break nuts and eat the kernels. Natural selection has ‘guided’ a behavioural change.
But let’s say a giraffe is born with genes giving it an extra leg. This giraffe has trouble running fast and is easily caught by a predator, so it doesn’t live long enough to pass on its genes. Therefore, we won’t see many giraffes walking around with five legs.
So, although gene mutations are random, over generations the mutations beneficial to the species can become normal to the species. That’s the process of natural selection. It is generally thought that most physical features and behavioural traits of organisms came about in this way.
In some circumstances, natural selection may result in a new species.
‘How do different species come about?’
Let’s say that on one side of a mountain range there are wide open spaces, and giraffes regularly fight with their heads to win mates. On the other side of the mountain is jungle, and a giraffe born in that jungle with a longer neck will have no advantage. It might well injure itself swinging. So, that ‘long neck’ mutation isn’t favoured.
Over tens of thousands of years, with those different conditions the two groups of giraffes will develop so many differences that if you were to bring them together and mate them, they could not produce fertile offspring. The two types of giraffes would have become separate species.
The giraffe’s closest extant (living) relative is the okapi, which lives in the Congo rainforest.
‘What is a subspecies?’
Imagine a river that becomes full of crocodiles and isolates a thousand giraffes on a large island. These giraffes can’t get back to the mainland to join the others, so the two groups can’t interbreed. Over time, the island giraffes develop their own characteristics (such as different markings or shorter necks).
If these island giraffes were transported to the mainland and were able to successfully breed with the mainland giraffes, the two groups would be the same species. However, because of their different characteristics the island giraffes (the minority) would be a subspecies.
Mind you, in all of nature it is not that clear cut. A species can be determined in other ways, too. The example given is simply an example of natural selection.
‘Lizards are different to giraffes. How can they be related?’
Their common ancestor goes back more than a hundred million years.
‘An eel-like creature from 505 million years ago was a forerunner to all vertebrates, from fish to humans. Fossil evidence confirms that Pikaia gracelens had a rod of elastic tissue running along its back, making it the oldest chordate ever found.’
New Scientist, 10 March 2012.
‘Did humans evolve from gorillas and chimpanzees? Or monkeys?’
No, but we share a common ancestor that may have looked like a nimble rodent. Over a long time, over large areas, and in varying conditions, those creatures evolved into different animals, depending on the environmental forces. A simple and speculative example: if the rodent-like animals lived in rainforests that offered abundant food in the trees, they would probably stay in the trees, and over millions of years become monkeys or apes. If any of those creatures had been born with the inclination and ability to walk on two legs they would have gained no survival advantage, so that mutation would quickly be bred out. Such a population might eventually evolve into another type of ape, but it wouldn’t evolve to be a bipedal ape.*
Let’s say another population of the same rodent-like animal lived in savannah plains, and found food in the long grass. The ones born with a mutation allowing them to stand on two legs and see above the grass might have a significant advantage, and be more likely to survive and produce offspring. Over millions of years they might evolve into bipedal, land dwelling apes.
That’s how different animals might evolve from one common ancestor.
* Susannah Thorpe and her colleagues of The University of Birmingham suggest another possibility: that our ancestors evolved to stand on two legs while still in the trees. Balancing on two feet and using their hands to hold branches for balance helped them reach the fruit on small, outlying branches (New Scientist, 9 June 2007). Another theory suggests that we became bipedal from having to wade in water.
‘Evolution cannot explain the origin of life.’
It’s not meant to. The origin of life has nothing to do with evolution. It’s a different topic entirely.
‘Are there other factors contributing towards evolution?’
One factor is epigenetics, which is about genes being influenced by the environment. For example, a creature living in drought conditions, unable to feed itself properly, might give birth to young smaller than normal. When those young grow up they might also give birth to young smaller than normal, even though the drought had ended and they (the parents) had eaten well! Had the drought not ended, then giving birth to smaller young might be an advantage for those young – they would need less food to stay alive. Another example: a creature living an abnormally stressful life might give birth to young that grow up more prone to becoming stressed than they otherwise would be, and when they give birth, their young might be born with genes switched on ready to make them stressed in even mild circumstances. That’s epigenetics.
Some viruses can also contribute towards a creature’s evolution by infecting its sperm or egg, thereby changing the creature’s DNA slightly. Those changes would be inherited by its young, and if those changes are beneficial then they will be passed on to future generations by the process of natural selection. For example, primates like chimpanzees, gorillas and us have within us ancient virus DNA that helps our females give birth to healthy young.