Makes me wonder in like 100,000 years if the Human species diversifies into a species that's more nocturnal... I am more of a nocturnal person as well and know that there's plenty of people living at night to avoid people.
@@marilynlucero9363 We already have become more nocturnal. Inventions such as electric lights have made it easier for humans to stay up at night. People used to sleep much earlier than us modern folk.
@@marilynlucero9363 There were always nocturnal people after all someone had to keep watch during the night. The difference is that now its a choice rather than being forced to do it.
This reminds me of a plant that is over harvested in the mountains of China. It used to be easier to find because of its brilliant color but then due to its popularity as a traditional medicine and the over harvest of it, those that remain in human accessible areas have changed color to camouflage with their surroundings. This change is not reflected in their counterparts in less easily accessible areas for humans. I forget the name of the plant though but I remember seeing this bit of news and found it interesting.
That’s very interesting! And in my impulsive act of curiosity, I looked it up. The plant is called Fritillaria delavayi and due to rapid human harvesting, they’ve evolved from a bright green bulb to brown and grey, to match their environment.
Because the harder to see ones weren't picked and survived so they were able to reproduce while the more brightly colored ones were easier to spot and plucked so they couldn't reproduce.
There are certain species of weeds i pick , that over the years when pulled on they shoot there seeds to still spread there genes even when pulled its crazy also sucks to get a face full of seeds
Australian White Ibis is also known locally as a Bin Chicken in cities. The more surprising evolution trait has been seen in rural Ibis populations in Northern Queensland, they have learnt how to catch and eat the poisonous Cane Toad. The Cane Toad is an evasive species that has no natural predators in Australia... until now. They will pick them up in their beaks and shake them violently until they squirt out the majority of their poison from their glands, then swallow them whole. The reward is an evolving behaviour and stomach changes (again like garbage eating) is they are less stress cause Cane Toads are fat, lazy and easy to catch.
@@MerkhVision The toxin is not as fatal to birds, due to evolution exposure to similar poisonous frogs. The rest appears to be just observation and experience. Raptors and crows have been documented learning what parts are safe to eat from picking at road killed Cane Toads.
@@boxhead6177 so you mean that, the toads that were killed from car accidents, were a source of food for the birds and without any prior knowledge they learnt how to avoid the poisonous parts? I mean how do they know what part is poisonous and what isn't ?
I’d love to know if there was a study on the rattlesnakes in texas! I was struck by the anecdote that yearly rattlesnake hunts that find the snake because of the rattle were selecting for snakes with no rattle at all, which ironically makes their cattle and kids LESS safe because they take away the snake’s ‘alarm bell’.
Great video. The hunting/ fishing of the biggest and healthiest made me think about natural selection of predators, where they typically hunt the weakest and cull the herd of the weak and sickly. Sport hunting creates the opposite effect.
Correct, which is likely humans role as predators. As moderators. Rams (in this instance) that grew larger than necessary horns for survival were killed off by humans, those that were too small or weak killed off by wolves. Those that are left are the goldy lox genes, big enough for survival but not expending (or consuming) extra energy on unnecessary gear
@@willieclark2256 except if that expenditure of energy was a significant disadvantage for no benefit, that would already negatively impact their ability to reproduce. Even if bigger horns only lead to better chances of reproduction, because the opposite sex finds those more attractive for arbitrary reasons: who are humans to say which size of horns is "ideal" for those animals? If the amount of energy they spend on growing their horns would be too much or the large horns would become cumbersome to them, natural selection would cover that already.
@@nitramreniar your point is built on the premise that human predation isn't natural. Second the expenditure of excess energy on 'animal weapons' actually leads to the extinction of hooved animals because they starve themselves trying to keep up with sexual selection i.e. the Irish Elk. Big horns are always more attractive to female cervid/bovine species so without a natural moderating force (human predation) these animals all follow the same route to starvation, not adapting but opening that niche to their subordinate/ smaller species (we see it this very day with whitetail expansion into mule deer range)
I saw this happen with the whitetail deer in the region where I grew up. The state [Montana] started allowing more Outfitters [professional hunting guides] in, to draw in more out-of-state hunters and their money. The Outfitters would scout the deer for months, knowing everything about them, and take the "hunters" right to the male deer, with the biggest antlers. - Even often going so far as to cut fences, and trespass to get that kill for the high rolling hunters. Within a decade, the antler size had gotten much smaller, while the body size went up - because they weren't hunting primarily for the food value, but the trophy value. Montana has since corrected some of this behavior with the Outfitters, but - I don't know if it's already too late.
In Pennsylvania I have noticed that bucks have definitely become more clever. And the older they are the more clever they are. Having their does cross a trail upwind from them a few seconds before he does to get the hunter to look the other way. I have even seen them hunched down walking on their knees (?) to stay unseen walking along a drift fence.
same with rhinos 🦏 it’s really a shame. African elephants with long tusks are incredibly majestic - just beautiful creatures. :) should we bring back mammoths ? :)🦣
@@harshvatwani2202 yeah, in SciFi it’s so easy. but DNA 🧬 is so delicate. so much can go wrong. wouldn’t it be great though if we could bring some of them back. have a good day :) 🌷🌱 (even in criminal cases, they’ve messed up the DNA and an innocent person is blamed - and sent to jail!! very annoying and very bad bad lab work!!)
Long hair is fine, but it really bugs me when people pull it over one shoulder. Grow your hair as long as you like, but I'm disturbed by your asymmetry.
When you were talking about bighorn sheep, you showed an image at 08:12 that was definitely NOT a bighorn sheep. It looked more like an Argali, or possibly a Barbary Sheep. The skulls that you showed at the end of that segment were definitely of Argali. Your fact checkers need to be more careful.
Bacteria evolving to process plastic is something I’m curious as to what effect it will have in thousands of years. Will those bacteria eventually become gut bacteria making it possible for some termites or rodent to eat plastic?
my theory is that plastics will just be more like wood produces, where they will decompose in a few years or decades vs centuries. Good for cleaning up the plastic out there and sadly inside us, but it will probably release more greenhouse gases
At least in South Florida, where I live, local white ibises have learned that human lawns are a great place to probe for earthworms and insect grubs. I often see them parading across people's lawns and through gardens doing just this.
BTW, I see someone's been reading "Darwin Comes To Town", which is a book specifically about urban evolution. If anyone hasn't read it yet, it's a really good read! :)
I wish there was a bit in this about rattlesnakes! I heard that rattle snakes have been naturally selected to not rattle before striking; the snakes that expose themselves ended up killed since humans hate snakes... I would love to see if anyone's done a real study on it or if this is just an urban legend.
Urban rattlesnakes are grayer than their more brown wild cousins to blend into concrete and landscaping. I can see an experienced rattler not rattling at a human, relying on their stealth rather than risk failing an intimidation roll.
I wouldn't say that we hate snake. More like we are collectively taught that snakes are dangerous and that their bite can kill. We also have the natural instinct that "rattling sound might be snake" which can be for a number of reasons. I can 100% see a snake learning to not rattle in the presence of humans. Or more specifically the snakes that don't rattle are naturally more cautious and thus more likely to reproduce. Not being aggressive towards another species is something that can be bred (as shown by domestication).
I encountered deer, turkeys, rabbits, groundhogs and bears while in upstate NY. The bears mostly stayed in the tree line but everything else you could find out on the road at night and into early morning. Even stranger was that they wouldn't run away most of the time. Now I mostly just see the usual possums, squirrel, geese, raccoons, ducks and maybe an occasional escaped farm animal like chicken or goat.
Mosquitos in the tropics are much faster than in temperate areas. The favourable temperature means higher population and faster breeding, resulting in faster evolution. Global warming as it is, soon enough the temperate zones will get faster mosquitos. I am not looking forward to that!!
Maybe that's part of why some ancient cultures made myths about the largest and strongest of a species, saying to show it respect. When you hunt those ones you hurt your future hunting options
what happened to the bighorn sheep in canada is the same thing that's happening to the whitetail deer population in florida. I've been hunting for over 15 years in florida, and i've noticed that just in that short amount of time alone, the deer have gotten progressively smaller, with more and more diminutive antlers. this is because the legislation which allows the taking of antlered deer during certain seasons has the deer being claimed far before they can even establish a herd of their own and spread their genes. this creates father dissipated herds that are more shy, more elusive, smaller, and most importantly, not really legal to shoot, even well into adulthood. the selective pressure applied by humans artificially selects for deer less likely to form herds, less likely to rut, less likely to breed, and less likely to grow antlers more than 2-3 inches in length with more than a total of 4 points.
Maybe we should buy a clue and stop killing Natives. We have our own food. I no longer fish and I buy and harvest nothing wild. Very few humans have to. But which of us has the guts to quit?
@@DonnaBarrHerself actually if more people just practiced sustainable hunting, the land and wildlife would be much better off. hunting is a conservation effort and it's vital to the ecosystem.
Very interesting! I wonder what impacts the lower herd sizes have on social development in young deer. Likely a small evolutionary change would cause a more dramatic behavioural change because young deer may follow their more solitary parents rather than a genetically identical deer from a larger herd.
@@connormcgee4711 this is basically what seems to be happening. Weirdly, there are still big bucks out there, but they are ALL solitary, skittish, and very difficult to see. they also seem to just be more clever than deer in other states, very intelligent. mind you this is just things i've observed on public land, specifically WMAs. the same might not apply on private land where deer are not hunted / hunted less. it's also worth noting that Florida has a huge issue with poachers, our rangers seem incapable of regulating season, legal shooting time, legal shooting age, etc. just very poorly managed all around, unless we're talking about state parks.
In my state, there are rural areas where the local landownder/hunters have taken to ignoring the conservation department's regulations. Instead of taking the larger antlered bucks, they try to determine the buck's age, and cull the older bucks with smaller racks. I first heard about this 20 years ago but I'm sure it's been going on for longer, and now the biggest bucks in my state are all coming from these areas. It does require cooperation from all the landowners in the area, in order to ensure that the most well-endowed bucks survive to reproduce. It also requires a degree of secrecy, since they are technically committing a crime every time they take a buck with an undersized rack. They have essentially formed an undeground conservation department, specifically to counteract the human-induced selection pressure of trophy hunting.
As someone who grew up in Montana, I adore this. People who ask me about Montana assume that hunters and fishers are mostly the trophy-type but in reality they usually care more about the environment AND do more for it than the most yuppie Portlander could
@@Abcwhatever That's so funny to me bc most people who deny evolution are Christian creationists. 😂 Like oh so you don't see it so you don't believe in it?? So, there's no God, right? Right??? *insert Anakin and Padme meme* (This is not a dunk on religious people btw, only evolution deniers! I'm a Welsh Pagan myself who follows the Druidism route and believes that the power of the Gods is within the Earth rather than separate, physical deities, but if you believe in any deity/creator or multiple deities/creators, more power to you! But you can't deny that evolution is real is all)
There is a humorous mockumentary here on RUclips called, "Planet Earth: Bin Chicken". I'd post a link, but it may get filtered as spam - it should come up in a search.
I don't remember whether I knew this from SciShow or other science channel, but every animal interactions are so closely related to each other and their environment, if humans (accidentally or not) remove an animal to extinction it would basically mean the imbalance in an ecosystem. The apex predator would keep on eating other animals without the old predator keeping their numbers in check, and soon the house of cards of species fall apart. Watching this video reminded me of that fact.
Rattlesnakes with defective rattles are more common now because so many of those that gave a warning were killed. This has led to a rise in "unprovoked" attacks
"Almost as if modern species evolved to their modern form and just stopped" - sadly, we had a teacher who thought that this was the case. Luckily she wasn't teaching biology and was ridiculed by students for the stupidity. The hair shaking at the end was mayestic!
Can we have a video looking into the changes we've made to farm animals? Sheep, horses and ornamental birds have fascinating changes. Only a few thousand years but wow!
The code in the grand banks off Canada used to be up over one hundrred pounds and were fished out till it was no longer profitable. To try reviving the fishery its was stoped for years but today iirc they only grow to 25 or 30 pounds. Sorry if I have misremembered
@@jeffbybee5207 that’s understandable. Even then if you look at footage of deadliest catch and compare early season catches to late you’ll see problems with over fishing. Different animals but similar consequences less or smaller catches the more fisheries are stressed.
Large mature fish make a much bigger contribution to reproduction because in fish, you can have a lot more eggs. Taking them out hurts the species now because they can't reproduce as much (meaning over time less fish to catch) and later because they will not have the genetics to make fish as big even if they had the time to grow, so the fisheries never recover. Fishing smaller fish means they can't reproduce, sure, but the weight in small fish taken is weight in large reproductive powerhouses not taken. It looks like this could be healthier for a population. Same biomass, less impact on reproductive capacity and genetics. The problem then is designing the right way to fish and we still need to figure out how much to fish as well. We tend to fish too much because on the short term it keeps the fishermen happy and thus the government can be reelected. Fishermen themselves also have a tendency to overestimate the abundance of fish by constantly fishing in the best spots while it is in the crappy spot that the population first declines (take away fish from good spot, fish in crappy spot moves to good spot, fisherman still catches fish, no visible problem until there isn't any fish moving in and it's already too late).
Reminds me of an article I read about elephant tusks becoming smaller over time due to poaching. Bigger tusks were targeted and smaller tusked males were able to reproduce
For anyone interested in the Coyote example, I highly recommend reading(or audiobook) Coyote America by Dan Flores as well as the 2 part episode of The Field Guides podcast. its seriously cool.
I figured this was a thing, as society we assume things evolve outside of our activities, it is our ignorance that does contribute to changes in even animal behavior especially. Like society will label other plants, bugs, and animals as "invasive" but tbh humans are the most invasive species. We just don't like that word applied to ourselves.
A small correction, at 1:10 in. Coyotes are native on the entire continent, not just, "West of the Mississippi." We have them in Appalachia. I'm fairly certain they didn't just spread to here, and on up into Canada. As for fishing changing species, look at the Great Lakes. There used to be commercial fishing. Introduced species like the aylewife (intentionally) and sea lampreys (accidentally, via the Erie Canal), ended that. More recently, the Mediterranean zebra mussel had devastated the entire Great Lakes ecosystem, by filter feeding from greater depth than normal mollusc predators go. Species of fish that used to be plentiful and found everywhere are now only found sporadically, usually nearer where cities expel their sewage, such that there's enough of the old food web left to sustain them.
Im always taking out the snail that go to the surface water of my aquarium... Does that mean im selectively breeding snails that stay below the water hahaha
on one hand i feel like we’re humans and should hold ourselves to a higher standard of morality and compassion but on the other hand it’s also a lot of pressure and a huge job for humans to simultaneously advance as well as stay inclusive and considerate of other species. it’s such a complicated balance that seems impossible to achieve.
@@julianschwertzthewoodlands4161 Every predator/prey relationship shows two species influencing the evolution of the other: the prey evolves a defense to confound the predator; the predator evolves a mechanism to overcome the defense; the prey evolves a defense to confound that mechanism; the predator evolves a mechanism to overcome that defense (rinse and repeat). One kind of example would be a poisonous frog developing a more toxic poison, its predator developing tolerance to the poison, the frog developing a still more toxic poison, the predator developing resistance to that poison, and so on. You end up with an extremely deadly frog, but with a seemingly miraculously (if you didn't know the history) resistant predator. Another kind of example would be an antelope and cheetah, but in this case would be evolving into faster and faster runners. Try searching "predator prey arms race".
Speaking of evolution, if you are looking for differences in a smaller time frame some plants go through hundreds of generations by the time we cycle through one. I love plants!
Do I even want to read the comments and see how many Creationists there are, screaming "WELL THOSE RAMS DIDN'T TURN INTO SOME OTHER ANIMAL, DID THEY? SO IT'S NOT EVOLUTION!" ? No, I think I'll pass today.
Like the coyotes, a Canadain study found similar diverged between rural and urban raccoon populations. It was discovered that urban raccoons shared more in common with other urban raccoons than their rural cousins and visa versa.
speaking of urban winners, central station sparrows collect the insects from the wind screens of waiting trains. they also chirp-beg for food, and many of them are brave enough to take the offered food from your fingertips.
I'm researching this right now and gathering data for other folks researching this, and as of right now the data is insufficient to affirmatively say this is occurring. So, for now, myth, but with enough time I'm sure it will be the verified as true. It is also worth mentioning that it would be a localized occurrence rather than ubiquitous across all rattlesnake populations, and the driver of it would differ too. Humans could do it, as could feral hogs. It could also be indirect, as their rsttle gives them away not to potential predators, but even prey. If their diet shifts enough to favor certain animals, their rattle would become obsolete. It's important to note that when researching this, it's incredibly difficult, since it's a behavioral change that can really depend from individual to individual, and it is also very prone to confirmation bias. Us snake researchers are working really hard to figure this out, so it means a lot that you've asked!
I have heard that the squirrels in London turned to darker fur starting during the industrial revolution because it better fit in to their sooty, darker environment.
Anyone else sitting here trying to learn getting distracted by michael's fantastic hairline? All I can think about is he's 3 years older than me and dammit I'm jealous.
1:09 - Wait a minute. Coyotes aren’t native east of the Mississippi? They’re considered a native species here in Florida and have been spotted in every county. Do they mean a specific type of coyote because the FFW says that they’re native and came due to habitat expansion? Asking for myself.
Coyotes don't naturally live in swampy places without humans there to provide easy food sources. They were a plains and parkland animal (living on the edges of wolves' forest and mountain territories)
Yeah, funny thing about that study of coyotes in LA 30% of their diet may have been people food, but more than 50% was pets/strays they'd killed and eaten.
Could probably reverse these trends with more managed hunting. Maybe have stretches of time where you are only allowed to kill off the smaller animals. With fish, maybe throw some of the biggest fish back. Of course there is a bit of a moral hazard here: while some people may follow the rules, others won't and larger animals may still be killed, but we can always punish poachers.
@@maromania7 Apparently "once per year" is not enough to make sure the bighorn sheep reproduce because they only start doing so after 10 years. So the idea would be more like no hunting for 10 years and then allowing it for 1 year, depending on the species. Or maybe allowing hunting for one out of every 5 years.
I was wondering if this might be the case - exposure to pesticides in human-altered environments. Corvids (crows and jays) have been recorded picking up cigarette butts and applying those to their feathers to control external parasites. Maybe the Ibis have figured out something similar? Though it is probably incidental pollution instead
I don't think it is "ibises". Maybe it is.... If they had removed the bolder fish, they would have opened up niches for the timid ones, so they would become bolder.
I'd just like to drop a (belated) comment to express my appreciation for the title. It lacks clearly clickbaity all caps tactics and gets to the point. I will watch more videos that have titles which embrace these principles.
Here is an off topic, fringe, pseudo-science, theory I had yesterday. What are your thoughts on the following? I can take the criticism so don't hold anything back. Thanks! What if the pyramid structures doted around the planet at specific latitudes and longitudes were ancient Ham Radios? If the piezoelectric effect were generated by the mass of the pyramids, while the buildings surrounding were equipped with stone analog logic gates you could say the entire Giza Plateau was a circuit board the size of a city. While harnessing that much geomagnetic energy it might be possible to tune the occilating frequency output from the obelisk towers. Thus turning it into an ancient two way antenna/ Ham Radio. If the output carrier wave were specifically tuned to the inverse harmonic resonance of the ionosphere you could, in theory, bounce data packets across the world to every other pyramidal structure set as a two way receiving antenna, simultaneously. Theoretically a 12,500 b.c.e. to 30,000 b.c.e world wide telegraph network of the most rudimentary design might have been possible. Think of the quartz crystals used as transducers, and signal attenuators housed within the logic gates which comprised the circuitry. One caveat. All this obviously assumes that boolean logic, and binary data transformations were harnessed to disambiguate between background radio noise and carrier waves. Now the hurdle of proving it which will undountedly be impossible. Because the passage of tens of thousands of years has erased everything not made of megalithic stone. But I digress. I'm clearly not an electrical, or computer, engineer. But if you can entertain the possibility by making several quantum leaps of faith I'd love to hear any alternative theories you might have. Thoughtfully yours; Delta Tesseract -{ 💚 }-
If left to survive in the wild they'd be extinct almost immediately, for certain. And even with the best veterinary care they don't live as long on average as most breeds. Trouble is, all they have to do is survive long enough to breed a litter, and there's your next generation. As long as there are people willing to spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars for a bulldog or pug puppy, they will outlive thousands of animal and plant species that nobody gives a F about.
1:23 "even though coyotes are not naturally nocturnal, they started looking for food at night to avoid humans."
I'm something of a coyote myself.
Makes me wonder in like 100,000 years if the Human species diversifies into a species that's more nocturnal...
I am more of a nocturnal person as well and know that there's plenty of people living at night to avoid people.
@@marilynlucero9363 We already have become more nocturnal. Inventions such as electric lights have made it easier for humans to stay up at night. People used to sleep much earlier than us modern folk.
Note to self: Keep RUclips commenters away from my cats.
@@marilynlucero9363 There were always nocturnal people after all someone had to keep watch during the night. The difference is that now its a choice rather than being forced to do it.
Same. I've preferred the night for most of my life. Largely to avoid other humans.
This reminds me of a plant that is over harvested in the mountains of China. It used to be easier to find because of its brilliant color but then due to its popularity as a traditional medicine and the over harvest of it, those that remain in human accessible areas have changed color to camouflage with their surroundings. This change is not reflected in their counterparts in less easily accessible areas for humans. I forget the name of the plant though but I remember seeing this bit of news and found it interesting.
That’s very interesting! And in my impulsive act of curiosity, I looked it up.
The plant is called Fritillaria delavayi and due to rapid human harvesting, they’ve evolved from a bright green bulb to brown and grey, to match their environment.
i don't like werewolves and i don't like vampires
Because the harder to see ones weren't picked and survived so they were able to reproduce while the more brightly colored ones were easier to spot and plucked so they couldn't reproduce.
There are certain species of weeds i pick , that over the years when pulled on they shoot there seeds to still spread there genes even when pulled its crazy also sucks to get a face full of seeds
@@monsterxenomorphvelocirapt2185 are you brain damaged?
Australian White Ibis is also known locally as a Bin Chicken in cities.
The more surprising evolution trait has been seen in rural Ibis populations in Northern Queensland, they have learnt how to catch and eat the poisonous Cane Toad. The Cane Toad is an evasive species that has no natural predators in Australia... until now.
They will pick them up in their beaks and shake them violently until they squirt out the majority of their poison from their glands, then swallow them whole. The reward is an evolving behaviour and stomach changes (again like garbage eating) is they are less stress cause Cane Toads are fat, lazy and easy to catch.
Came to comment about bin chooks, ended up learning
Thanks for this , that was cool
I wonder how those bin chickens learned how to deal with the poison!?
@@MerkhVision The toxin is not as fatal to birds, due to evolution exposure to similar poisonous frogs. The rest appears to be just observation and experience.
Raptors and crows have been documented learning what parts are safe to eat from picking at road killed Cane Toads.
@@boxhead6177 so you mean that, the toads that were killed from car accidents, were a source of food for the birds and without any prior knowledge they learnt how to avoid the poisonous parts?
I mean how do they know what part is poisonous and what isn't ?
I’d love to know if there was a study on the rattlesnakes in texas! I was struck by the anecdote that yearly rattlesnake hunts that find the snake because of the rattle were selecting for snakes with no rattle at all, which ironically makes their cattle and kids LESS safe because they take away the snake’s ‘alarm bell’.
Great video. The hunting/ fishing of the biggest and healthiest made me think about natural selection of predators, where they typically hunt the weakest and cull the herd of the weak and sickly. Sport hunting creates the opposite effect.
Indeed it does, I have hunted for most of my life and personally I try to harvest the ones that are not at peak shape.
Thank you for bringing this up. I had never thought of it before.
Correct, which is likely humans role as predators. As moderators. Rams (in this instance) that grew larger than necessary horns for survival were killed off by humans, those that were too small or weak killed off by wolves. Those that are left are the goldy lox genes, big enough for survival but not expending (or consuming) extra energy on unnecessary gear
@@willieclark2256 except if that expenditure of energy was a significant disadvantage for no benefit, that would already negatively impact their ability to reproduce. Even if bigger horns only lead to better chances of reproduction, because the opposite sex finds those more attractive for arbitrary reasons: who are humans to say which size of horns is "ideal" for those animals? If the amount of energy they spend on growing their horns would be too much or the large horns would become cumbersome to them, natural selection would cover that already.
@@nitramreniar your point is built on the premise that human predation isn't natural. Second the expenditure of excess energy on 'animal weapons' actually leads to the extinction of hooved animals because they starve themselves trying to keep up with sexual selection i.e. the Irish Elk. Big horns are always more attractive to female cervid/bovine species so without a natural moderating force (human predation) these animals all follow the same route to starvation, not adapting but opening that niche to their subordinate/ smaller species (we see it this very day with whitetail expansion into mule deer range)
I saw this happen with the whitetail deer in the region where I grew up. The state [Montana] started allowing more Outfitters [professional hunting guides] in, to draw in more out-of-state hunters and their money.
The Outfitters would scout the deer for months, knowing everything about them, and take the "hunters" right to the male deer, with the biggest antlers. - Even often going so far as to cut fences, and trespass to get that kill for the high rolling hunters.
Within a decade, the antler size had gotten much smaller, while the body size went up - because they weren't hunting primarily for the food value, but the trophy value.
Montana has since corrected some of this behavior with the Outfitters, but - I don't know if it's already too late.
In Pennsylvania I have noticed that bucks have definitely become more clever. And the older they are the more clever they are. Having their does cross a trail upwind from them a few seconds before he does to get the hunter to look the other way. I have even seen them hunched down walking on their knees (?) to stay unseen walking along a drift fence.
The same size reduction ( or absent) is happening with elephant tusks.
same with rhinos 🦏 it’s really a shame. African elephants with long tusks are incredibly majestic - just beautiful creatures. :)
should we bring back mammoths ? :)🦣
@@feralbluee I think they are already trying to recreate the mammoth but it is incredibly difficult, so far I have heard.
Omestly i wonder how would they fight without tusks. Trunk wrestling?
@@shawnheng4686 yeah, maybe. they already use them for so many things. and they’re smart as heck!! :) 🐘🌷🌱
@@harshvatwani2202 yeah, in SciFi it’s so easy. but DNA 🧬 is so delicate. so much can go wrong. wouldn’t it be great though if we could bring some of them back. have a good day :) 🌷🌱
(even in criminal cases, they’ve messed up the DNA and an innocent person is blamed - and sent to jail!! very annoying and very bad bad lab work!!)
Here for continued support of Michael's hair "evolution" into decidedly, firmly, metal territory. Not sure if I miss the highlights, yet.
He normally puts some in around Halloween.
Long hair is fine, but it really bugs me when people pull it over one shoulder.
Grow your hair as long as you like, but I'm disturbed by your asymmetry.
They.should do a video on his mane!
No. He looks like a hippy. Cut it now.
@@mywa8314 no he looks amazing! You're probably just jealous.
Elephants losing their tusks is another important example.
When you were talking about bighorn sheep, you showed an image at 08:12 that was definitely NOT a bighorn sheep. It looked more like an Argali, or possibly a Barbary Sheep. The skulls that you showed at the end of that segment were definitely of Argali. Your fact checkers need to be more careful.
Bacteria evolving to process plastic is something I’m curious as to what effect it will have in thousands of years. Will those bacteria eventually become gut bacteria making it possible for some termites or rodent to eat plastic?
Hell, we all will need it because we inadvertently ingest it as well.
@@1MarkKeller hah no it's small enough to become part of our DNA so plastic eating bacteria sounds terrifying
my theory is that plastics will just be more like wood produces, where they will decompose in a few years or decades vs centuries. Good for cleaning up the plastic out there and sadly inside us, but it will probably release more greenhouse gases
@@c.fyffe0 ?
Some mealworm larvæ can eat and somewhat digest polystyrene thanks to their gut bacteria.
At least in South Florida, where I live, local white ibises have learned that human lawns are a great place to probe for earthworms and insect grubs. I often see them parading across people's lawns and through gardens doing just this.
BTW, I see someone's been reading "Darwin Comes To Town", which is a book specifically about urban evolution. If anyone hasn't read it yet, it's a really good read! :)
No more need for lawn flamingos
I wish there was a bit in this about rattlesnakes! I heard that rattle snakes have been naturally selected to not rattle before striking; the snakes that expose themselves ended up killed since humans hate snakes... I would love to see if anyone's done a real study on it or if this is just an urban legend.
Urban rattlesnakes are grayer than their more brown wild cousins to blend into concrete and landscaping. I can see an experienced rattler not rattling at a human, relying on their stealth rather than risk failing an intimidation roll.
I wouldn't say that we hate snake. More like we are collectively taught that snakes are dangerous and that their bite can kill. We also have the natural instinct that "rattling sound might be snake" which can be for a number of reasons.
I can 100% see a snake learning to not rattle in the presence of humans. Or more specifically the snakes that don't rattle are naturally more cautious and thus more likely to reproduce. Not being aggressive towards another species is something that can be bred (as shown by domestication).
@@Temperans PBS Eons has a video of primates and snakes and their co-evolution. Check it out. Apparently we do have somewhat of a rivalry.
I encountered deer, turkeys, rabbits, groundhogs and bears while in upstate NY. The bears mostly stayed in the tree line but everything else you could find out on the road at night and into early morning. Even stranger was that they wouldn't run away most of the time. Now I mostly just see the usual possums, squirrel, geese, raccoons, ducks and maybe an occasional escaped farm animal like chicken or goat.
What's a squire?
@@brighterthansunshine4355 Squirrel?
@@brighterthansunshine4355 When spell check changes a rodent into a shield bearer or armor bearer of a knight.
@@BigMobe 🤣
@@BigMobe 😂😂
Every time I kill a slow mosquito I shed a tear at the thought that I judt naturally selected for faster mosquitos.
Mosquitos in the tropics are much faster than in temperate areas. The favourable temperature means higher population and faster breeding, resulting in faster evolution. Global warming as it is, soon enough the temperate zones will get faster mosquitos. I am not looking forward to that!!
Every time I miss killing a fast mosquito I think the same thing!! The hardest ones bounce around in the air
He has the most perfect voice for narration. Good job finding him SciShow!
Maybe that's part of why some ancient cultures made myths about the largest and strongest of a species, saying to show it respect. When you hunt those ones you hurt your future hunting options
what happened to the bighorn sheep in canada is the same thing that's happening to the whitetail deer population in florida. I've been hunting for over 15 years in florida, and i've noticed that just in that short amount of time alone, the deer have gotten progressively smaller, with more and more diminutive antlers. this is because the legislation which allows the taking of antlered deer during certain seasons has the deer being claimed far before they can even establish a herd of their own and spread their genes. this creates father dissipated herds that are more shy, more elusive, smaller, and most importantly, not really legal to shoot, even well into adulthood.
the selective pressure applied by humans artificially selects for deer less likely to form herds, less likely to rut, less likely to breed, and less likely to grow antlers more than 2-3 inches in length with more than a total of 4 points.
Maybe we should buy a clue and stop killing Natives. We have our own food. I no longer fish and I buy and harvest nothing wild. Very few humans have to. But which of us has the guts to quit?
@@DonnaBarrHerself actually if more people just practiced sustainable hunting, the land and wildlife would be much better off. hunting is a conservation effort and it's vital to the ecosystem.
Very interesting! I wonder what impacts the lower herd sizes have on social development in young deer. Likely a small evolutionary change would cause a more dramatic behavioural change because young deer may follow their more solitary parents rather than a genetically identical deer from a larger herd.
But the little guys are probably happy to be getting some tail.
@@connormcgee4711 this is basically what seems to be happening. Weirdly, there are still big bucks out there, but they are ALL solitary, skittish, and very difficult to see.
they also seem to just be more clever than deer in other states, very intelligent.
mind you this is just things i've observed on public land, specifically WMAs. the same might not apply on private land where deer are not hunted / hunted less.
it's also worth noting that Florida has a huge issue with poachers, our rangers seem incapable of regulating season, legal shooting time, legal shooting age, etc. just very poorly managed all around, unless we're talking about state parks.
In my state, there are rural areas where the local landownder/hunters have taken to ignoring the conservation department's regulations. Instead of taking the larger antlered bucks, they try to determine the buck's age, and cull the older bucks with smaller racks. I first heard about this 20 years ago but I'm sure it's been going on for longer, and now the biggest bucks in my state are all coming from these areas. It does require cooperation from all the landowners in the area, in order to ensure that the most well-endowed bucks survive to reproduce. It also requires a degree of secrecy, since they are technically committing a crime every time they take a buck with an undersized rack.
They have essentially formed an undeground conservation department, specifically to counteract the human-induced selection pressure of trophy hunting.
As someone who grew up in Montana, I adore this. People who ask me about Montana assume that hunters and fishers are mostly the trophy-type but in reality they usually care more about the environment AND do more for it than the most yuppie Portlander could
Interesting! Thanks for sharing.
Yet, there's still people out there that doubt evolution, where they could measure it by themselves.
"I do not see it happen, therefore it's not real." Also "I do not want to spend the time looking up [topic], but I know my view is correct"
@@Abcwhatever That's so funny to me bc most people who deny evolution are Christian creationists. 😂 Like oh so you don't see it so you don't believe in it?? So, there's no God, right? Right??? *insert Anakin and Padme meme*
(This is not a dunk on religious people btw, only evolution deniers! I'm a Welsh Pagan myself who follows the Druidism route and believes that the power of the Gods is within the Earth rather than separate, physical deities, but if you believe in any deity/creator or multiple deities/creators, more power to you! But you can't deny that evolution is real is all)
Selective breeding does NOT prove evolution. Selective breeding is even in the Bible.
Because most of them believe in thousand years old fairy tale books
@@experience741 Like the fairytale "Origin of Species?" The kids love it and the unicorn intermediate species.
In Australia the Ibis is known as the "Bin Chicken"
There is a humorous mockumentary here on RUclips called, "Planet Earth: Bin Chicken". I'd post a link, but it may get filtered as spam - it should come up in a search.
I can thank Bluey for teaching me this, lol.
If Michael doesn't do every ad from here on out, we all collectively agree to riot.
I don't remember whether I knew this from SciShow or other science channel, but every animal interactions are so closely related to each other and their environment, if humans (accidentally or not) remove an animal to extinction it would basically mean the imbalance in an ecosystem. The apex predator would keep on eating other animals without the old predator keeping their numbers in check, and soon the house of cards of species fall apart.
Watching this video reminded me of that fact.
In America raccoons are called 'trash pandas', in Australia white Ibises are called 'bin chickens' because they both go through the trash for food.
Rattlesnakes with defective rattles are more common now because so many of those that gave a warning were killed. This has led to a rise in "unprovoked" attacks
I was actually thinking about whether fish had adapted to fishing practices or not, thank you🙏
I came here to learn and I did. I came to comment because I have never seen a snack bar eaten so fabulously before in my life. That was art.
"Almost as if modern species evolved to their modern form and just stopped" - sadly, we had a teacher who thought that this was the case. Luckily she wasn't teaching biology and was ridiculed by students for the stupidity.
The hair shaking at the end was mayestic!
Can we have a video looking into the changes we've made to farm animals? Sheep, horses and ornamental birds have fascinating changes. Only a few thousand years but wow!
I always wondered when fish size would be affected. I know why we legally harvest over certain size but at what point does small not equal immature?
The code in the grand banks off Canada used to be up over one hundrred pounds and were fished out till it was no longer profitable. To try reviving the fishery its was stoped for years but today iirc they only grow to 25 or 30 pounds. Sorry if I have misremembered
@@jeffbybee5207 that’s understandable. Even then if you look at footage of deadliest catch and compare early season catches to late you’ll see problems with over fishing. Different animals but similar consequences less or smaller catches the more fisheries are stressed.
Large mature fish make a much bigger contribution to reproduction because in fish, you can have a lot more eggs. Taking them out hurts the species now because they can't reproduce as much (meaning over time less fish to catch) and later because they will not have the genetics to make fish as big even if they had the time to grow, so the fisheries never recover.
Fishing smaller fish means they can't reproduce, sure, but the weight in small fish taken is weight in large reproductive powerhouses not taken. It looks like this could be healthier for a population. Same biomass, less impact on reproductive capacity and genetics.
The problem then is designing the right way to fish and we still need to figure out how much to fish as well. We tend to fish too much because on the short term it keeps the fishermen happy and thus the government can be reelected. Fishermen themselves also have a tendency to overestimate the abundance of fish by constantly fishing in the best spots while it is in the crappy spot that the population first declines (take away fish from good spot, fish in crappy spot moves to good spot, fisherman still catches fish, no visible problem until there isn't any fish moving in and it's already too late).
10:10 🤣 When something taste good I whip my hair back and fourth
Reminds me of an article I read about elephant tusks becoming smaller over time due to poaching. Bigger tusks were targeted and smaller tusked males were able to reproduce
Some are even being born completely tuskLESS!
Evolution is so fascinating!
Thanks SciShow 💕
For anyone interested in the Coyote example, I highly recommend reading(or audiobook) Coyote America by Dan Flores as well as the 2 part episode of The Field Guides podcast. its seriously cool.
Really learned a lot from this, thanks for the insightful content!
All this info is cool (as are most of the episodes) but the most pleasing part has been watching your mane grow!! Amazing!
Elephants are having the same issue with tusks
I figured this was a thing, as society we assume things evolve outside of our activities, it is our ignorance that does contribute to changes in even animal behavior especially. Like society will label other plants, bugs, and animals as "invasive" but tbh humans are the most invasive species. We just don't like that word applied to ourselves.
A small correction, at 1:10 in. Coyotes are native on the entire continent, not just, "West of the Mississippi." We have them in Appalachia. I'm fairly certain they didn't just spread to here, and on up into Canada.
As for fishing changing species, look at the Great Lakes. There used to be commercial fishing. Introduced species like the aylewife (intentionally) and sea lampreys (accidentally, via the Erie Canal), ended that. More recently, the Mediterranean zebra mussel had devastated the entire Great Lakes ecosystem, by filter feeding from greater depth than normal mollusc predators go. Species of fish that used to be plentiful and found everywhere are now only found sporadically, usually nearer where cities expel their sewage, such that there's enough of the old food web left to sustain them.
And now gobies are making it even worse
Im always taking out the snail that go to the surface water of my aquarium... Does that mean im selectively breeding snails that stay below the water hahaha
I gave this a thumb up for firstly the evolution finds but mostly those luscious locks of hair!
Thanks
on one hand i feel like we’re humans and should hold ourselves to a higher standard of morality and compassion but on the other hand it’s also a lot of pressure and a huge job for humans to simultaneously advance as well as stay inclusive and considerate of other species. it’s such a complicated balance that seems impossible to achieve.
Jokes on yall, I was laying down and DID have a snack next to me lol.
Such a good video! Wish there was a pt2! Just scratching the surface
I’m pretty sure the entire history of life is full of examples of one species influencing the evolution of another.
Yes very good. In this video, we explore the consequences of humans doing exactly that!
I would really love to see a video on how other species influenced the evolution of another.
@@julianschwertzthewoodlands4161 Every predator/prey relationship shows two species influencing the evolution of the other: the prey evolves a defense to confound the predator; the predator evolves a mechanism to overcome the defense; the prey evolves a defense to confound that mechanism; the predator evolves a mechanism to overcome that defense (rinse and repeat).
One kind of example would be a poisonous frog developing a more toxic poison, its predator developing tolerance to the poison, the frog developing a still more toxic poison, the predator developing resistance to that poison, and so on. You end up with an extremely deadly frog, but with a seemingly miraculously (if you didn't know the history) resistant predator.
Another kind of example would be an antelope and cheetah, but in this case would be evolving into faster and faster runners.
Try searching "predator prey arms race".
Thank you for your excellent work educating folks about this very important topic.
Speaking of evolution, if you are looking for differences in a smaller time frame some plants go through hundreds of generations by the time we cycle through one. I love plants!
Me too, mostly those I can smoke! 😉
That was the smoothest transition to a brand deal I've ever seen
Adam Ragusea is an artist at ad transitions.
Do I even want to read the comments and see how many Creationists there are, screaming "WELL THOSE RAMS DIDN'T TURN INTO SOME OTHER ANIMAL, DID THEY? SO IT'S NOT EVOLUTION!"
?
No, I think I'll pass today.
Always excellent Michael
Interesting.!
This sheds light on so many issues!
That hair toss! 😆 love it man!
Ugg. Grrr. Me like Munk Pack. Munk Pack good. Grr.
Maybe he's born with it, maybe it's Munk bars
Amazing information 💯❤️
I might have to start watching more commercials now … the elegance. LOL
7:35 that pike fish looks so sad and scared like 🥺
The hair is amazing as usual Michael!!!! The flip is the ad at the end was hilarious 😂😃
Outstanding hair toss in the ad 😎🙆🏻♂️🙋♂️
Like the coyotes, a Canadain study found similar diverged between rural and urban raccoon populations. It was discovered that urban raccoons shared more in common with other urban raccoons than their rural cousins and visa versa.
The increasing rate of elephants lacking tusks is another example. No tusks means not getting shot for ivory.
very informative!
speaking of urban winners, central station sparrows collect the insects from the wind screens of waiting trains.
they also chirp-beg for food, and many of them are brave enough to take the offered food from your fingertips.
Coyotes started becoming more nocturnal to avoid contact with humans? *Me watching this at 1:00 AM* "Not just coyotes."
I think some of us may be evolving into Morlocks.
Is the rattleless rattlesnakes evolving thing a myth or not?
I'm researching this right now and gathering data for other folks researching this, and as of right now the data is insufficient to affirmatively say this is occurring. So, for now, myth, but with enough time I'm sure it will be the verified as true.
It is also worth mentioning that it would be a localized occurrence rather than ubiquitous across all rattlesnake populations, and the driver of it would differ too. Humans could do it, as could feral hogs. It could also be indirect, as their rsttle gives them away not to potential predators, but even prey. If their diet shifts enough to favor certain animals, their rattle would become obsolete.
It's important to note that when researching this, it's incredibly difficult, since it's a behavioral change that can really depend from individual to individual, and it is also very prone to confirmation bias.
Us snake researchers are working really hard to figure this out, so it means a lot that you've asked!
The GOAT of all rams.
That mosquito's latin name is so accurate because they do "molest us" 😆
I have heard that the squirrels in London turned to darker fur starting during the industrial revolution because it better fit in to their sooty, darker environment.
Michael showing off his mane. Meanwhile, my own terminal length has shrunk to the point where my mom no longer gets on my case to get a haircut.
I’ve said this for twenty years guys! Same reason why dear and elk are smaller today than 50 years ago.
That is what I call enlightening edification
Anyone else sitting here trying to learn getting distracted by michael's fantastic hairline? All I can think about is he's 3 years older than me and dammit I'm jealous.
I can confirm the sighting of coyotes in NYC. A reliable witness was surprised by one on her walk home from work in the Bronx this week.
Let’s not forget that the heavy human predation on rattlesnakes for those revolting “rattlesnake roundups” have forced selection for quieter snakes
This is my favorite topic
pewds roasts the facia hair 5 yrs ago and you still rocking it, way to go!
7:00 how the hell do they know the qualities of the fish they DIDN'T catch?
Because the fish bold enough to catch tended to be bigger compared to the average for the species
1:59-2:00 glitch of the maps NYC appearing on the host lol
Elephants born with no tusk because poaching has become so rampant
Scishow: How humans effect evolution! Woo!
Evolution: The Anthropocene
1:09 - Wait a minute. Coyotes aren’t native east of the Mississippi? They’re considered a native species here in Florida and have been spotted in every county. Do they mean a specific type of coyote because the FFW says that they’re native and came due to habitat expansion? Asking for myself.
I was literally asking the same thing! I’m from Florida and now live in upstate NY and both have plenty of coyotes native to these states.
Coyotes don't naturally live in swampy places without humans there to provide easy food sources. They were a plains and parkland animal (living on the edges of wolves' forest and mountain territories)
Wait, coyotes in wetlands and coastal areas? They're originally prairie and desert animals.
Aren't "native" and "came due to habitat expansion" contradictory terms?
Or is this a different definition of "native" than I am used to?
Yeah, funny thing about that study of coyotes in LA 30% of their diet may have been people food, but more than 50% was pets/strays they'd killed and eaten.
You really called me out for lying down and not wanting to get up for food
bull-goat set and lightning ram
Could probably reverse these trends with more managed hunting. Maybe have stretches of time where you are only allowed to kill off the smaller animals. With fish, maybe throw some of the biggest fish back. Of course there is a bit of a moral hazard here: while some people may follow the rules, others won't and larger animals may still be killed, but we can always punish poachers.
That has been fish & game policy for at least 50 years
That's what a hunting season is. When you're allowed to kill each type of animal is already regulated, and has been for a while.
@@maromania7 Apparently "once per year" is not enough to make sure the bighorn sheep reproduce because they only start doing so after 10 years. So the idea would be more like no hunting for 10 years and then allowing it for 1 year, depending on the species. Or maybe allowing hunting for one out of every 5 years.
An additional hypothesis, I bet the ibis gets less parasites because our city’s are fumigated for pests.
I was wondering if this might be the case - exposure to pesticides in human-altered environments. Corvids (crows and jays) have been recorded picking up cigarette butts and applying those to their feathers to control external parasites. Maybe the Ibis have figured out something similar? Though it is probably incidental pollution instead
I don't think it is "ibises". Maybe it is....
If they had removed the bolder fish, they would have opened up niches for the timid ones, so they would become bolder.
But, which species of stork did we train to carry babies? ;p hehehe
Such awesome hair 🥰
I'm kinda surprised that they didn't mention the peppered moth.
I'd just like to drop a (belated) comment to express my appreciation for the title. It lacks clearly clickbaity all caps tactics and gets to the point. I will watch more videos that have titles which embrace these principles.
It’s the little meow after he said pets cats for me
Here is an off topic, fringe, pseudo-science, theory I had yesterday. What are your thoughts on the following? I can take the criticism so don't hold anything back. Thanks!
What if the pyramid structures doted around the planet at specific latitudes and longitudes were ancient Ham Radios?
If the piezoelectric effect were generated by the mass of the pyramids, while the buildings surrounding were equipped with stone analog logic gates you could say the entire Giza Plateau was a circuit board the size of a city. While harnessing that much geomagnetic energy it might be possible to tune the occilating frequency output from the obelisk towers. Thus turning it into an ancient two way antenna/ Ham Radio. If the output carrier wave were specifically tuned to the inverse harmonic resonance of the ionosphere you could, in theory, bounce data packets across the world to every other pyramidal structure set as a two way receiving antenna, simultaneously. Theoretically a 12,500 b.c.e. to 30,000 b.c.e world wide telegraph network of the most rudimentary design might have been possible.
Think of the quartz crystals used as transducers, and signal attenuators housed within the logic gates which comprised the circuitry.
One caveat. All this obviously assumes that boolean logic, and binary data transformations were harnessed to disambiguate between background radio noise and carrier waves.
Now the hurdle of proving it which will undountedly be impossible. Because the passage of tens of thousands of years has erased everything not made of megalithic stone.
But I digress.
I'm clearly not an electrical, or computer, engineer. But if you can entertain the possibility by making several quantum leaps of faith I'd love to hear any alternative theories you might have.
Thoughtfully yours;
Delta Tesseract
-{ 💚 }-
If Munk Packs give you hair like his, they're worth every dime.
Coyotes are abundant in eastern states now, but most of the ones we see here are smaller than their western brethren. That may be an adaptation too.
My horns have remained large throughout my life.
In Australia 🇦🇺 ibises are known as bin chickens 🐓
The Bin Chicken is going to be the mascot for the 2032 Olympics.
Elephants are losing their horns in a similar way to the sheep
Influencing evolution! Just look at all the dogs we have wrecked the bulldog and pug are too far gone they are destined to extinction
If left to survive in the wild they'd be extinct almost immediately, for certain. And even with the best veterinary care they don't live as long on average as most breeds. Trouble is, all they have to do is survive long enough to breed a litter, and there's your next generation. As long as there are people willing to spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars for a bulldog or pug puppy, they will outlive thousands of animal and plant species that nobody gives a F about.