Comments on: The Evolution of 3-D http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/02/20/the-evolution-of-3-d/ A blog about life, past and future. Written by DISCOVER contributing editor and columnist Carl Zimmer. Sat, 26 May 2012 01:25:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Carl Zimmer http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/02/20/the-evolution-of-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-2671 Carl Zimmer Tue, 21 Feb 2006 14:33:18 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/02/20/the-evolution-of-3-d/#comment-2671 Peter (#3): If Mesostigma did indeed descend from a land plant and lost its ability to make meristems, then you'd expect that one particular lineage of living land plants would be more closely related to it than to other land plants. Consider a parallel example: whales lost their legs, having descended from mammals with legs. Studies on DNA bear this out: hippos are more closely related to whales than to other mammals. But when it comes to Mesostigma, studies on plant DNA don't bear this prediction out. While the precise placement of Mesostigma is still being worked out, it's now clear that all living land plants are more closely related to one another than they are to Mesostigma. So it branched off before the origin of land plants. Here's one recent <a href="http://www.amjbot.org/cgi/content/abstract/91/10/1535" rel="nofollow">study</a> bearing on ths. Peter (#3): If Mesostigma did indeed descend from a land plant and lost its ability to make meristems, then you’d expect that one particular lineage of living land plants would be more closely related to it than to other land plants. Consider a parallel example: whales lost their legs, having descended from mammals with legs. Studies on DNA bear this out: hippos are more closely related to whales than to other mammals.

But when it comes to Mesostigma, studies on plant DNA don’t bear this prediction out. While the precise placement of Mesostigma is still being worked out, it’s now clear that all living land plants are more closely related to one another than they are to Mesostigma. So it branched off before the origin of land plants. Here’s one recent study bearing on ths.

]]> By: Peter Ellis http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/02/20/the-evolution-of-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-2670 Peter Ellis Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:47:14 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/02/20/the-evolution-of-3-d/#comment-2670 Is it completely clear that the BIP genes arose before the evolution of 3D plants? Could it also be that Mesostigma has 3D plants in its ancestry but has somehow lost the ability to form meristem and thus returned to algal life? Is it completely clear that the BIP genes arose before the evolution of 3D plants? Could it also be that Mesostigma has 3D plants in its ancestry but has somehow lost the ability to form meristem and thus returned to algal life?

]]> By: john http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/02/20/the-evolution-of-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-2669 john Tue, 21 Feb 2006 01:33:07 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/02/20/the-evolution-of-3-d/#comment-2669 Another thing humans have in common with them is that heretics were traditionally burned at the stake, built often from oak. But seriously, how could the first land plants have evolved 475 million years ago if the planet has only been here for thousands of years? No, really... If the mighty oak tree evolved from moss, why do we still have moss. OK... I can't be serious today. Hey, it's a holiday! Another thing humans have in common with them is that heretics were traditionally burned at the stake, built often from oak.

But seriously, how could the first land plants have evolved 475 million years ago if the planet has only been here for thousands of years?

No, really… If the mighty oak tree evolved from moss, why do we still have moss.
OK… I can’t be serious today. Hey, it’s a holiday!

]]> By: Carl Manaster http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/02/20/the-evolution-of-3-d/comment-page-1/#comment-2668 Carl Manaster Mon, 20 Feb 2006 18:00:11 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2006/02/20/the-evolution-of-3-d/#comment-2668 I'm pretty sure that the historical record can confirm the fossil record here; I believe I have read about land plants in books that date considerably before 1531 AD. :-) I’m pretty sure that the historical record can confirm the fossil record here; I believe I have read about land plants in books that date considerably before 1531 AD. :-)

]]>