Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Blind Mole is iridescent, just because the design worked out that way

Denyse O'Leary
January 28, 2012
Darwinism, News
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

In “World’s only iridescent mammal is a shiny accident” (New Scientist, 25 January 2012), Michael Marshall reports,

Animals from butterflies to birds have iridescent colours to draw the eye. But why golden moles? They spend most of their lives in near-darkness – and they’re blind.

The theory has been that iridescent colours should attract a mate, but in the mole,

Now a study of the structure of the hairs shows that they may be designed to streamline the moles or repel water, rather than attract a mate.

Which, we are told, is “an evolutionary accident.” Which raises an interesting question: How many of the claimed mate-finding features of life forms are in fact accidents of another process? Perhaps they only accidentally – or only in the researcher’s imagination – attract a mate?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments
Well, oily puddles aren't iridescent to attract a mate! We simply don't know for sure which features of living things evolved for which, if any, adaptive function, although we can make some good guesses for obvious features. But sexual selection is a factor we shouldn't ignore. That doesn't mean that all features for which sexual selection has been posited as an adaptive function actually were. Looks like in this case it may have been waterproofing. Or just one of those things.Elizabeth Liddle
January 30, 2012
January
01
Jan
30
30
2012
06:29 AM
6
06
29
AM
PDT
How many of the claimed mate-finding features of life forms are in fact accidents of another process? Perhaps they only accidentally – or only in the researcher’s imagination – attract a mate?
Possibly quite a few: scientists are human, so we do fall into the "if it looks like it's for attracting mates, then it's for attracting mates" fallacy. of course, we can always test whether a trait is to attract mates (or if it has other functions).Heinrich
January 29, 2012
January
01
Jan
29
29
2012
04:49 AM
4
04
49
AM
PDT
Its a excellent observation in pointing out how one correction can be expanded into a general law of correction in all things biological. There is a marsupial mole. Does it have like attributes.? I do insist a law of correction should be also used in seeing marsupial moles are just the same creatures as placental moles . That marsupialism is a minor adaption and so the creatures of australia are not from wild ideas of convergent evolution but just the same creatures as elsewhere with a trivial reproductive difference and a few other points. Biological corrections are there for the taking.Robert Byers
January 28, 2012
January
01
Jan
28
28
2012
05:12 PM
5
05
12
PM
PDT
'Perhaps they only accidentally – or only in the researcher’s imagination – attract a mate?' Still, it's nice when you get the 'glad eye', when you're not expecting it. I expect moles feel the same. Sorry to lower the tone for a moment.Axel
January 28, 2012
January
01
Jan
28
28
2012
04:49 PM
4
04
49
PM
PDT

Leave a Reply