798
submitted 8 months ago by sag@lemm.ee to c/comicstrips@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] crawancon@lemm.ee 40 points 8 months ago

mmm their unevolved blood is $$$$$

[-] VieuxQueb@lemmy.ca 11 points 8 months ago

I wonder if it's different blood base makes it less susceptible to dna mutations ?

[-] LeadEyes@lemmy.world 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

What it really meant when people talk about living fossils etc is that the morphology of the creature has changed very little. Genetically and on a cellular level there would definitely be a lot of changes from their earlier forms millions of years ago. DNA just doesn't stick around for more than a couple hundred thousand years maximum it seems so it's difficult for us to chart those changes that aren't visible in morphology. Creatures that seem to not change drastically in such long scale time usually have niches and environments that haven't changed drastically in their existence.

[-] Beryl@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Well put. Although on the outside, a creature may seem not to have changed in any recognizable way, mutations nevertheless accumulated in its DNA with each generation. That's why we probably should avoid to use the term living fossil.

load more comments (1 replies)
this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2024
798 points (98.9% liked)

Comic Strips

12601 readers
1516 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS