Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Stick insects’ “remarkable camouflage” postdates mammals and birds


From ScienceDaily, concerning a study of over 2000 genes from various species, rather than just a handful:

Stick and leaf insects are a diverse and strikingly bizarre group of insects with a world-wide distribution, which are more common in tropical and subtropical areas. They are famous for their impressively large body size, compared to other insects, and their remarkable ability to camouflage themselves as twigs, leaves or bark in order to hide from potential predators. A team of international researchers led by the University of Göttingen has now generated the first phylogenomic tree of these insects. The results have been published in the journal Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution.

The most surprising finding is that the relationships between the early emerging groups of stick and leaf insects largely disprove the earlier assumptions. In fact, the genealogy reflects more the geographic distribution than the anatomical similarity of the animals. The authors revealed a New World lineage of purely North and South American species and a group of Old World origin that comprises species from Africa to New Zealand.

The biogeographic history was reconstructed by Sarah Bank, PhD student at the University of Göttingen and coauthor of the study, which resulted in further unexpected results: “The flamboyant stick insects of Madagascar, for instance, descended from a single ancestral species who colonised the island approximately 45 million years ago.”

The age estimation of the phylogenetic tree suggests that most of the old lineages emerged after the dinosaurs became extinct 66 million years ago. Thus, the remarkable camouflage of stick and leaf insects most probably evolved afterwards as adaptation against predatory mammals and birds.

“Stick insects become more and more important as model organisms for evolutionary research. The new comprehensive molecular dataset won’t be exhaustively analysed for quite some time and will provide exciting insights into the function of the numerous detected genes,” explains Bradler with regard to future studies. Paper. (open access) – Sabrina Simon, Harald Letsch, Sarah Bank, Thomas R. Buckley, Alexander Donath, Shanlin Liu, Ryuichiro Machida, Karen Meusemann, Bernhard Misof, Lars Podsiadlowski, Xin Zhou, Benjamin Wipfler, Sven Bradler. Old World and New World Phasmatodea: Phylogenomics Resolve the Evolutionary History of Stick and Leaf Insects. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution, 2019; 7 DOI: 10.3389/fevo.2019.00345 More.

Of course, they don’t come right out and say this but if the stick insects’ amazing camouflages developed after they started to be eaten by predatory mammals and birds, there was not as much time as was thought for the Darwinian claim:

It may be said that natural selection is daily and hourly scrutinizing, throughout the world, every variation, even the slightest; rejecting that which is bad, preserving and adding up all that is good; silently and insensibly working, wherever and whenever opportunity offers, at the improvement of each organic being in relation to its organic and inorganic conditions of life.

Once calculation becomes possible, Darwinism will usually fail. Something else is happening.

See also: Unlike the furtive ants, stick insects really have, allegedly, gone a million years without sex

Follow UD News at Twitter!

One wonders how a Darwinist would explain (other than by just-so stories) the "evolution" of such insects. In principle, one can perhaps see how an insect already 99% of the way there could, through random mutations and natural selection, achieve the last percentage point over many generations of tweaking and trying. But how does the process get started? A generic stick insect that does not look at all like a real stick or a leaf would also have small random mutations, but is seems a big stretch to suggest that any feasible mutation at that stage would actually make the insect sufficiently better camouflaged to out-reproduce its neighbour. This is like the genetic hill-climbing needed to perfect a new protein: feasible if you are already on the hill, but unrealistic if you are far from any hill. And then there is the question of how many mutations separate the generic insect from the current finely tuned models, and the time required to generate those mutations randomly and fix them in the population sequentially. Meanwhile, as the "good" mutations are getting fixed, how many bad ones are accumulating in the genome? Fasteddious
You know it is VERY telling that biologists have published a few hundred thousand papers this year and yet not one paper supports the claims of blind watchmaker evolution. It's as if the concept is totally useless and worthless. They don't have a mechanism capable of producing eukaryotes so forget about insects and birds... ET
Perhaps stick insects traveled back in time, or perhaps Darwin is continued to be proven wrong. I'm waiting for the Darwinists to start demanding research be done into time traveling insects. It must be easy to be a Darwinist, since they never have to worry about things like a lack of evidence. BobRyan
> In fact, the genealogy reflects more the geographic distribution than the anatomical similarity of the animals. Well, doggonit! I so hate it when expectations don't pan out. Oh well, at least it keeps another generation of Darwinians employed. EDTA

Leave a Reply