Moderators: kiore, Blip, The_Metatron
Animavore wrote:I'm not sure what I'm not understanding, but science articles on the webz are claiming the chicken came first.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/life/g ... tion85.htm
https://sciencebasedlife.wordpress.com/ ... he-answer/
Both these, for instance, say the egg came first because the direct ancestor of the first chicken, the almost, but not quite, chicken, mixed the sperm and egg which had a mutation in it which arose in the egg.
But surely there was no first chicken? I was led to believe that every creature born is of the same species of its parents and other members of that species. I mean it has to be, otherwise what can it breed with?
Biology. the major subdivision of a genus or subgenus, regarded as the basic category of biological classification, composed of related individuals that resemble one another, are able to breed among themselves, but are not able to breed with members of another species.
Chickens evolved from non-chickens through small changes caused by the mixing of male and female DNA or by mutations to the DNA that produced the zygote. These changes and mutations only have an effect at the point where a new zygote is created. That is, two non-chickens mated and the DNA in their new zygote contained the mutation(s) that produced the first true chicken. That one zygote cell divided to produce the first true chicken.
Prior to that first true chicken zygote, there were only non-chickens. The zygote cell is the only place where DNA mutations could produce a new animal, and the zygote cell is housed in the chicken's egg. So, the egg must have come first.
scott1328 wrote:It actually is a matter of definition.
What does it mean for an egg to be a chicken egg? Is it an egg that a chicken lays? Or is it an egg whence a chicken hatches?
Pick one. And the riddle is solved.
zoon wrote:Yes, the answer to your question seems to depend on context
1 a : the hard-shelled reproductive body produced by a bird and especially by the common domestic chicken; also : its contents used as food
b : an animal reproductive body consisting of an ovum together with its nutritive and protective envelopes and having the capacity to develop into a new individual capable of independent existence
zoon wrote:
You could always try reading to the end of a post before answering it. I wrote that the definition of egg seems to me to change with context, and gave examples. The Merriam-Webster dictionary agrees:1 a : the hard-shelled reproductive body produced by a bird and especially by the common domestic chicken; also : its contents used as food
b : an animal reproductive body consisting of an ovum together with its nutritive and protective envelopes and having the capacity to develop into a new individual capable of independent existence
The first context is the everyday one, the context in which the phrase "a chicken and egg situation" is likely to come up. The second definition is used in the context of biology, as in the articles to which the OP linked. In the first, the emphasis is on what produces the egg, in the second, the emphasis is on what the egg is going to turn into (as scott1328 was pointing out). Are you accusing the people at Merriam-Webster of being unable to make up their minds?
The_Piper wrote:So there is no wrong answer, but if you're asking me it's the egg. Because even if the mutation was in the parent of the first chicken and not the first chicken itself, the first chicken's parent was born from an egg too.
LucidFlight wrote:The_Piper wrote:So there is no wrong answer, but if you're asking me it's the egg. Because even if the mutation was in the parent of the first chicken and not the first chicken itself, the first chicken's parent was born from an egg too.
Now, what about the egg the parent (aka "first chicken") came from? Was it a chicken egg or pre-chicken egg? Or am I thinking too much about this during my coffee break? Is the question asking about if a "chicken egg" came first or just any old egg? Because, if "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken, surely the egg itself would be of a pre-chicken; that is, "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken egg. So, to sum up: "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken egg, and then the first chicken egg came from "first chicken". I'm so wired right now.
ETA
Just to be clear: in the above, highly-philosophical scenario, the chicken came first.
DavidMcC wrote:LucidFlight wrote:The_Piper wrote:So there is no wrong answer, but if you're asking me it's the egg. Because even if the mutation was in the parent of the first chicken and not the first chicken itself, the first chicken's parent was born from an egg too.
Now, what about the egg the parent (aka "first chicken") came from? Was it a chicken egg or pre-chicken egg? Or am I thinking too much about this during my coffee break? Is the question asking about if a "chicken egg" came first or just any old egg? Because, if "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken, surely the egg itself would be of a pre-chicken; that is, "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken egg. So, to sum up: "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken egg, and then the first chicken egg came from "first chicken". I'm so wired right now.
ETA
Just to be clear: in the above, highly-philosophical scenario, the chicken came first.
No, the egg came first. Why do I say that? Because that egg will contain some allele that makes it slightly different from the chicken that laid it. Of course, it would be all but impossible to tell the differencr between the pre-chicken and its true-chicken offspring, but for argument's sake it suffices.
Animavore wrote:DavidMcC wrote:LucidFlight wrote:The_Piper wrote:So there is no wrong answer, but if you're asking me it's the egg. Because even if the mutation was in the parent of the first chicken and not the first chicken itself, the first chicken's parent was born from an egg too.
Now, what about the egg the parent (aka "first chicken") came from? Was it a chicken egg or pre-chicken egg? Or am I thinking too much about this during my coffee break? Is the question asking about if a "chicken egg" came first or just any old egg? Because, if "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken, surely the egg itself would be of a pre-chicken; that is, "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken egg. So, to sum up: "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken egg, and then the first chicken egg came from "first chicken". I'm so wired right now.
ETA
Just to be clear: in the above, highly-philosophical scenario, the chicken came first.
No, the egg came first. Why do I say that? Because that egg will contain some allele that makes it slightly different from the chicken that laid it. Of course, it would be all but impossible to tell the differencr between the pre-chicken and its true-chicken offspring, but for argument's sake it suffices.
Which one of these chicken breeds is the 'true' one?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chicken_breeds
Sorry. Not convinced it's as cut and dry as you make it.
Animavore wrote:LucidFlight wrote:
Now, what about the egg the parent (aka "first chicken") came from? Was it a chicken egg or pre-chicken egg? Or am I thinking too much about this during my coffee break? Is the question asking about if a "chicken egg" came first or just any old egg? Because, if "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken, surely the egg itself would be of a pre-chicken; that is, "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken egg. So, to sum up: "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken egg, and then the first chicken egg came from "first chicken". I'm so wired right now.
ETA
Just to be clear: in the above, highly-philosophical scenario, the chicken came first.
No, the egg came first. Why do I say that? Because that egg will contain some allele that makes it slightly different from the chicken that laid it. Of course, it would be all but impossible to tell the differencr between the pre-chicken and its true-chicken offspring, but for argument's sake it suffices.
DavidMcC wrote:Animavore wrote:DavidMcC wrote:LucidFlight wrote:
Now, what about the egg the parent (aka "first chicken") came from? Was it a chicken egg or pre-chicken egg? Or am I thinking too much about this during my coffee break? Is the question asking about if a "chicken egg" came first or just any old egg? Because, if "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken, surely the egg itself would be of a pre-chicken; that is, "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken egg. So, to sum up: "first chicken" came from a pre-chicken egg, and then the first chicken egg came from "first chicken". I'm so wired right now.
ETA
Just to be clear: in the above, highly-philosophical scenario, the chicken came first.
No, the egg came first. Why do I say that? Because that egg will contain some allele that makes it slightly different from the chicken that laid it. Of course, it would be all but impossible to tell the differencr between the pre-chicken and its true-chicken offspring, but for argument's sake it suffices.
Which one of these chicken breeds is the 'true' one?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chicken_breeds
Sorry. Not convinced it's as cut and dry as you make it.
Sorry, you seem to have got the wrong end of the stick, because, (A) you have not specified a specfic chicken and its specific offspring, and (B), I have already implied that there may not be a discernible difference in any case, and that it is only for argument's sake. Get it? Or do you genuinely believe that the chicken changes its own genome before laying an egg?!
Animavore wrote:DavidMcC wrote:Animavore wrote:DavidMcC wrote:
No, the egg came first. Why do I say that? Because that egg will contain some allele that makes it slightly different from the chicken that laid it. Of course, it would be all but impossible to tell the differencr between the pre-chicken and its true-chicken offspring, but for argument's sake it suffices.
Which one of these chicken breeds is the 'true' one?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chicken_breeds
Sorry. Not convinced it's as cut and dry as you make it.
Sorry, you seem to have got the wrong end of the stick, because, (A) you have not specified a specfic chicken and its specific offspring, and (B), I have already implied that there may not be a discernible difference in any case, and that it is only for argument's sake. Get it? Or do you genuinely believe that the chicken changes its own genome before laying an egg?!
(A) Any chicken chosen would be arbitrary.
(B) If there's no discernible difference then they are both chickens. There would be no feature that would preclude one from the other without choosing an arbitrary mutation with which to say, "Here is the breaking off point". Which leads back to A.
DavidMcC wrote:Animavore wrote:DavidMcC wrote:Animavore wrote:
Which one of these chicken breeds is the 'true' one?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chicken_breeds
Sorry. Not convinced it's as cut and dry as you make it.
Sorry, you seem to have got the wrong end of the stick, because, (A) you have not specified a specfic chicken and its specific offspring, and (B), I have already implied that there may not be a discernible difference in any case, and that it is only for argument's sake. Get it? Or do you genuinely believe that the chicken changes its own genome before laying an egg?!
(A) Any chicken chosen would be arbitrary.
(B) If there's no discernible difference then they are both chickens. There would be no feature that would preclude one from the other without choosing an arbitrary mutation with which to say, "Here is the breaking off point". Which leads back to A.
I see you're still completely missing the point of the thread, which was that genetic change appears in the egg before the chicken that hatches from it. Simple, really.
DavidMcC wrote:Animavore wrote:DavidMcC wrote:Animavore wrote:
Which one of these chicken breeds is the 'true' one?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chicken_breeds
Sorry. Not convinced it's as cut and dry as you make it.
Sorry, you seem to have got the wrong end of the stick, because, (A) you have not specified a specfic chicken and its specific offspring, and (B), I have already implied that there may not be a discernible difference in any case, and that it is only for argument's sake. Get it? Or do you genuinely believe that the chicken changes its own genome before laying an egg?!
(A) Any chicken chosen would be arbitrary.
(B) If there's no discernible difference then they are both chickens. There would be no feature that would preclude one from the other without choosing an arbitrary mutation with which to say, "Here is the breaking off point". Which leads back to A.
I see you're still completely missing the point of the thread, which was that genetic change appears in the egg before the chicken that hatches from it. Simple, really.
Return to Evolution & Natural Selection
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest