A shock for evolutionists - man does not stem from apes but sharks!

carlosMM

Deity
Joined
May 14, 2003
Messages
8,570
Well, a bit of irony in the title, I hope y'all can understand that :p

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-04/plos-bve032807.php

Bony vertebrate evolution: Elephant sharks closer to humans than teleost fish


Cartilaginous fishes (sharks, rays, skates, and chimaeras) are the phylogenetically oldest group of living jawed vertebrates. They are also an important outgroup for understanding the evolution of bony vertebrates such as human and teleost fishes. In a new study published online this week in the open access journal PLoS Biology, Byrappa Venkatesh, Sydney Brenner, and colleagues performed survey sequencing (1.4× coverage) of a chimaera, the elephant shark (Callorhinchus milii).

The elephant shark genome, estimated to be about 910 Mb long, comprises about 28% repetitive elements. Comparative analysis of approximately 15,000 elephant shark gene fragments revealed examples of several ancient genes that have been lost differentially during the evolution of human and teleost fish lineages. Interestingly, the human and elephant shark genomes exhibit a higher degree of synteny and sequence conservation than human and teleost fish (zebrafish and fugu) genomes, even though humans are more closely related to teleost fishes than to the elephant shark. Unlike teleost fish genomes, the elephant shark genome does not seem to have experienced an additional round of whole-genome duplication. These findings underscore the importance of the elephant shark as a useful "model" cartilaginous fish genome for understanding vertebrate genome evolution.


See here - open access journal:

http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0050101



I, for one, an not so surprised - the exact position of the sarcopterygii has not been resolved sufficiently to make the claim that 'man is more closely related to recent teleostei'. Conclusion: WE NEED MORE FOSSILS :drool:
 
Not really surprised, but I keep track of these things.
 
This april fools isnt even remotely convincing...
 
Ok so i read the thread title!

Can someone changet the thread title? Its obviously not what the articles talking about.
 
Ok so i read the thread title!

Can someone changet the thread title? Its obviously not what the articles talking about.

Why not just comment on the article rather than the title?
 
Ok, disregarding this article, didnt amphibians descend from lung fishes which descended from ray finned fishes?

Ray finned fishes are not sharks.
 
Ok, disregarding this article, didnt amphibians descend from lung fishes which descended from ray finned fishes?
Not quite. The first tetrapods, traditionally considered "amphibians", descended from lobe-finned fish closely related to lungfish, but the lobe-finned fish are sisters of the ray-fins, not descendants.

Edit: Added for illustration:
sysq6.gif
 
Not quite. The first tetrapods, traditionally considered "amphibians", descended from lobe-finned fish closely related to lungfish, but the lobe-finned fish are sisters of the ray-fins, not descendants.

Damnit i got those fish confused.

I didnt mean rayfinned i meant lobe-finned.

They look like this kind of fish.

CoelArnaz66.jpg
 
Youre three days late. April Fools is over.
 
No, this is wrong. The apes evolved and became humans. The sharks did not evolve. They became lawyers.

EDIT: Adamb0mb got PWNED oh yes. :cool:
 
Back
Top Bottom