| |
Research
Broken arms and collateral damage:
Clues to predator-driven evolution
Nancy Ross-Flanigan
News Service
Ever since Darwin’s day, scientists have been trying to understand
how interactions among living creatures—competition and predation,
for example—drive evolution.
Recent work by paleontologists Tomasz Baumiller of U-M and Forest Gahn
of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History offers
new insights into the process. A report on their research appears in
the Sept. 3 issue of Science.
Biologists long have speculated that predators and prey play a game of
evolutionary one-upsmanship, in which an adaptation on the part of one—say, sharper
teeth in a predator—prompts a “go-you-one-better” response
in the other—tougher hide in the prey, for instance.
Hints that this has occurred are scattered throughout the fossil record,
but not evenly, Baumiller says. During one part of the Paleozoic Era known
as the Middle Paleozoic Marine Revolution, for example, the diversity of
shell-crushing predators increased explosively. Around the same time, some
380 million years ago, mollusks and other shell-bearing marine animals developed
better protective devices, such as more spines or more tightly coiled shells.
Apparently, the prevalence of shell-crushers prompted development of
better defenses against them. But simply finding evidence of changes
in both predators and prey doesn’t prove that one caused the other, Baumiller notes. “You
have to provide evidence that they, in fact, were interacting.”
To search for such evidence, Baumiller and his former graduate student Gahn
studied fossil crinoids, a group of marine animals related to starfish and
sea urchins. Crinoids, also called sea lilies, have feathery arms that they
extend to catch bits of plankton or detritus passing by in the current.
Like their starfish cousins and other animals in the group known as echinoderms,
crinoids are capable of regenerating lost body parts. Because modern
day crinoids usually lose—and regenerate—their arms as a
result of attacks by fish, Baumiller and Gahn reasoned that arm regeneration
in fossil crinoids would be a good indicator of predator-prey interactions
in the geologic past.
To test their idea, they examined more than 2,500 Paleozoic crinoids for
evidence of arm regeneration, focusing on fossils from the Ordovician to
Pennsylvanian periods (490 to 290 million years ago). As predicted, they
found that the only significant increase in regeneration frequency was during
the Middle Paleozoic Marine Revolution.
“Indeed, the frequency of regeneration, which we regard as a proxy
for predation intensity, was low during intervals before the Middle Paleozoic
Marine Revolution, and then there was a sudden increase, coincident with
the diversification of predators and the increase in the evolutionary response
of the prey,” Baumiller says.
That’s not the whole story, though. Baumiller and Gahn suspect that
crinoids were not the intended targets of the predators that inflicted damage
upon them, and that their broken arms were simply “collateral damage.” Crinoids,
Baumiller explains, play host to a variety of other organisms that take
up residence on various parts of their bodies, and the predators probably
were going after those creatures.
One way to test this would be to look for correlations between the degree
of infestation and the rate of regeneration, and Baumiller, Gahn and Carlton
Brett, a paleontologist from the University of Cincinnati, have applied for
funding to do just that.
The current research was supported by a Fulbright Research Fellowship to
Baumiller and by grants from the Geological Society of America, the Scott
M. Turner Fund (U-M) and the American Chemical Society.
More Stories
|
|