5
   

Evolution and Sex

 
 
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 06:35 pm
A single cell is Asexual. At some point along the scale of evolution, sex became a team sport.

Unfortunately my understanding of the finer details of evolutionary theorum is limited so I come to you for answers.

If the first sexual being was either male or female, its mutation would have died out without the other. Assuming they both arrived together with the full equipment required to do so, they would have needed to know what to do with themselves to procreate. Does evolution cover this period with a scientific explanation?

Why did asexuality die out? It seems to me that asexual procreation would be far a superior mutation while perhaps a little less fun.

 
mark noble
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 06:42 pm
Just elements colliding buddy. Calling them into opposition and genderising them wont deduct from that:)
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  3  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 07:54 pm
@Smileyrius,
Sexual reproduction is extremely valuable within a gene pool because it increases variation which allows for more selection to occur. The end result is that it accelerates the evolutionary process dramatically. And since all (that I know of) of the more complex multicellular organisms on this planet reproduce sexually, it's likely that we only exist because of sexual reproduction.

On the flip side it should be noted that asexual reproduction has not "died out", probably because it has advantages too, namely that it's very convenient and effective. It's probably even more functional in certain environments that sexual reproduction is. Usually for microorganisms.

As for the original evolutionary steps required to bridge the gap from asexuality to sexuality, it's a virtual certainty that the first organisms to share genes in reproduction were neither Male or Female, but simply organisms which each reproduced by combining genes from another organism. At this stage they were probably too rudimentary even to be a combination of Male and Female, but rather they were simply "sharers".
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 08:18 pm
@rosborne979,
Usually micoroganisms, but also aphids and stuff.
0 Replies
 
SweetT
 
  3  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 08:56 pm
@Smileyrius,
Hmmmm is this really necessary.
Can't speak for you, but I am glad species changed and we have male and female today. Life wouldn't be as fun;)
roger
 
  3  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 08:58 pm
@SweetT,
When was the last time you saw an unhappy amoeba?
SweetT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 Jan, 2013 09:02 pm
@roger,
Last I checked they showed not much emotion
0 Replies
 
nothingtodo
 
  2  
Reply Wed 2 Jan, 2013 12:35 am
@Smileyrius,
Your attitude is very highly attuned, well thought out.
Asexuality did not die out.. It simply did not require to change for survival.
The most advanced species in the universe, is probably asexual based on temporal start points of species within the same billion years... It is expected they are highly non momentary and are adaptive, but not prone to momentary unusual behavior.

They will have earned such a state of being through environmental adaptation and collective management.
A skew to abnormality surviving may have resulted in any number of mutations equivalent in outcome to gender assignment, but not definitely as weak or strong per argument.
SweetT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Jan, 2013 07:07 pm
@nothingtodo,
hmmmmmm
nice name is it fitting??? Wink
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Evolution and Sex
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/18/2021 at 01:26:58