Lamarck did. Neodarwinism theorises that species evolve when gene frequencies change, not individual organisms. Larmarkism is true for epigenetic inheritance, favourable and unfavourable characteristics alike.
Extreme radiation events of the organisms that survive the mass extinctions as they evolve to occupy the niches abandoned by the organisms going extinct.
Population is the unit of evolution. A population is defined as a group of organisms of a particular species that inhabits a particular area. Natural selection acts on traits within that population that are beneficial in the particular area. Another population of the same species may be under different selective pressures (as it is found in a different location), and natural selection may therefore act on different traits within that second population. The two populations, thus, may evolve differently. Therefore, the unit of evolution is the population, not species.
When things evolve, the whole species doesn't change. Theres one member of the species that is born different (slightly) and if it does well then it passes on its genes. The old species doesn't go away unless for some reason it stops doing well and dies out (by "doing well" I mean finding enough food and reproducing.) So to answer your question in a more straight forward way, they DID evolve because they aren't the same as prehistoric apes. They just didn't evolve in the same way we did.
No, he recognised that species evolve into new species.
bye
evolve
Over time species evolve into new species.
Different organisms evolve different features because they do not have exactly the same ecological niche, or purely through random chance.
Groups of organisms separated from other populations can evolve to form different species over many generations. As bacteria can produce many generations in 24 hours they tend to evolve rapidly. Birds separated by land or water barriers need perhaps one or two hundred years to develop separate characteristics forced on the population by the environment. Individuals can not evolve, only species can evolve by passing on genetic material that enable their offspring to survive long enough to breed. If the environment acts against the offspring with certain characteristics eg a pale moth on a dark background, then those individuals are removed from the gene pool thus affecting the characteristics of the next generation.
Organisms differ because their DNA differs from one species to another, and from one member of each species to another. Organisms differ because according to 'Darwinian science' creatures evolve to fill niches of ecological web. In other words, when species evolve it is to become better adapted to their environment, have a greater aptitude at surviving and then feed on what used to be its predators- who in turn adapt to survive. As this system progresses entropy increases causing an ever increasing diversity of life-forms.
It is not correct to say that individuals evolved because it is not possible for an individual to change drastically over their own timelife. Species have the faculty to evolve as a whole not as individual organisms.
they change in ways or mutate in to a different form.
Yes they evolve slowly over time and a panda and raccoon have common ancestors.
the ozone layer began to develop shielding earth from ultraviolet rays, this was hypothesized that these changes allowed species of single celled organisms to evolve into more complexed organisms
the ozone layer began to develop shielding earth from ultraviolet rays, this was hypothesized that these changes allowed species of single celled organisms to evolve into more complexed organisms
the ozone layer began to develop shielding earth from ultraviolet rays, this was hypothesized that these changes allowed species of single celled organisms to evolve into more complexed organisms