r/evolution

Here's some examples I can think of. (Note that I consider chimpanzees and other species closely related to humans to be cheating, since there's a good chance they evolved that trait as part of a common ancestor instead of independently.)

• The indri is a type of large lemur that is the only mammal other than humans that can hear rhythm.
• The only other mammals other than humans to undergo menopause are certain cetaceans like orcas, belugas and narwhals.
• Beavers are the only other mammal that can actively shape their environment.
• While homosexuality is common in the animal kingdom, sheep are the only non-human animal capable of being EXCLUSIVELY attracted to the same sex, with 10 percent of rams preferring other rams.
• Ground hornbill evolution somewhat parallels humans, in that they started out as arboreal frugivores before transitioning to grassland predators.
• Many ants have domesticated livestock like aphids and caterpillars for their honeydew.
• There's a species of damselfish that farms algae, and has domesticated a type of shrimp to help fertilize it with their droppings the same way many farmers in Asia use ducks.

Clearly humans that tolerated being around wood smoke (fire) and eating food flavoured with wood smoke (preserved and disinfected) would have an evolutionary advantage.

Most other types of smoke (Plastic, Hair) smell awful so I don't think it's a coincidence that we enjoy wood smoke.

Is this due to the benefits that wood smoke and it's consequences provided to early humans?

As mentioned in the title, I'm trying to learn more about ant evolution, but I want to make sure I'm not studying outdated or scientifically invalid papers. What is your method for checking if a paper is accepted in modern science, or even if it is modern, how do you verify if it is valid or not

What I'm asking is has there been other times in the history of life where a single species been able to evolve to such a level where other species are no longer even really competition for them?

Why were dinosaurs so big? What caused them to shrink so much overtime, evolving into birds? is the reason why dinosaurs were so big in any way similar to why animals are larger in deep sea? (not sure if this is a relevant question in this subreddit)

See also: The publication in the journal Frontiers in Mammal Science

What would need to happen for an animal to get bigger in size, and things get like dinausore?

I was reading Campbell's Biology for an exam tomorrow and came across this line: "A trait that is favorable in one place or time may be useless—or even detrimental—in other places or times."
It got me wondering: are there any examples of the opposite of this? ie., are there any now-extinct species that had characteristics (detrimental or otherwise) that would make them absolutely dominate in the modern world?

Pre historic animals have a certain .. look .. yk, like pakicetus. You look at him and go 'oh yeah he USED to be around'. Which animals still feel like that?

My friend called it "brainwashing" from society and i just don't understand how exactly..... sorry pls help :(

i am just curious is things remained similar or changed a bit in genetics and reasoning ? or is it like evolution happened but not much .Can a greek intellectual like aristotle brought back here do he able to achieve same milestone as any human ..

my thing is that humans evolved alot in faster pace, we are not like we before 50kyears back ,before 10k years we been having complex structures of family and language where grammer became bigger , once like before 50k years back we might speaking some robotic proto language , i mean not alot robotic but we might feel the primitiveness..

we been evolving this fast in just 50k years , i just curious why cant we from past 3k years .hmm

I know there are groups of hunter gatherers found in Asia who have tightly coiled hair like people in Papua New Guinea, so why don’t Indians have it?

I know that calling them dumb is misleading but I mean compared to H. sapiens

Ik bipedal forms are better at long distance and energy conservation but I also know predation came super early in evolution so it's not like a chase down predators did not have a niche. Is it because the skills to make chase down hunting truly special require larger brains like group hunts and tool use. I am just curious. I am also aware of animals like birds and their ancestors that are/were bipedal but the vast majority of animals are quadripeads

With millions of years of evolution, you’d expect at least one other species to get somewhere close to human intelligence. So why didn’t it happen?