Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Robotics Science

Robots Modeled On Ancient Fish Help Researchers Study Origins of Extinct Species 29

Posted by Soulskill from the just-stop-them-before-they-evolve-death-rays dept.
Hallie Siegel writes: Hypotheses about the evolution of traits in ancient species are difficult to test, as the animals have often been extinct for thousands or millions of years. In this article, researchers at Vassar College describe how a population of physical, free-swimming robots modeled after ancient fish evolved vertebrae under selection pressures for predator avoidance and foraging ability, showing how evolutionary robotics can be used to help biologists test hypotheses about extinct animals.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Robots Modeled On Ancient Fish Help Researchers Study Origins of Extinct Species More

Robots Modeled On Ancient Fish Help Researchers Study Origins of Extinct Species

Comments Filter:

  • Evolution random elements. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Wednesday December 10, 2014 @10:57AM (#48564653)

    We tend to think that each trait evolved was there for some sort or benefit. However a trait can happen just as long as it didn't create a significant hindrance.

    So if you take the normal bell curve. On the left side are traits that are harmful, on the right side you get traits that are helpful.

    Lets say 2 sigma to the left means the disadvantage is large enough to cause them to die before they can reproduce. So the disadvantages that are 1 sigma to the which are still harmful will pass on to the next generation then you got traits that fall on the average which are neutral. Over time you get on the average better, however not all traits have a use initially or ever.

    Lets use humans who have acne. There is no real advantage to it, it is slightly disfigurating so it could reduce your chances of mating, you can get wounds that cause infections... But that is so minor that passing the genes that cause acne over and over.
    Now lets say in a million year the acne had evolved over time that causes the skin to be thicker, and act as a form of armor. But right now it is just an inconvenience, or after a million years it can go away, or just still plague people.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You make a great point about trait evolution. In the research paper that we summarize, we take pains to distinguish three kinds of evolutionary products: adaptations, accidents, and by-products. Please take a look at the paper, if you have time and interest, so see how we set this up. Open access: http://journal.frontiersin.org/Journal/10.3389/frobt.2014.00012/abstract

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Sorry. I'm new to Slashdot. Didn't mean to be anonymous. This is John Long, Vassar College. Cheers.

    • This isn't quite how it works: "So if it's explained by selection pressure, it's evolution. If it's explained by lack of selection pressure, it's evolution. Go falsifiability!" It's not evolution itself that is being tested but rather the particular evolutionary mechanism. Most people assume that adaptation -- evolution by natural selection -- is the only way that evolution works. Not the case, as jellomizer points out correctly. So we test to see which, if any, of the different mechanisms are likely
    • Some traits have multiple effects, only some of which are beneficial. Like your acne example is possibly a side effect of oily skin which may have other evolutionary benefits. Large head size is a good example, giving capacity for greater intelligence at the cost of infants needing more care because they have to exit the womb earlier.

    • If you work outdoors, like most of our ancestor did, you generally don't get acne. (One theory is that the sun's radiation kills the related bacteria, or at least co-produces chemicals that do.) Thus, acne is not a good example because it's mostly caused by modern living.

      Generally those who are more attractive, especially females, get more resources than the ugly, so acne genes probably would have been filtered away under normal circumstances.

  • So the arms race between Jesus Fish vs Darwin Fish [yahoo.com] goes up by one notch now?
  • The same as with this story: http://hardware.slashdot.org/s... [slashdot.org]

    I fail to understand why do they spend so much time using robots, while modern physics engines can do these kind of simulations infinitely more efficiently and at a fraction of the cost and time.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Heyo! This is Sonia Roberts, lead author on the publication.

      We used physical robots at Vassar and collaborated with groups at Lafayette College to create a physics engine-based computer simulation.

      It's a common misconception that writing some computer code is necessarily faster and less expensive than building robots. We got our robotic system up and running some preliminary experiments a couple of years before the computer simulation was finished. Flexible, composite solids bending in fluids are not easy t

      • I read the entire paper, thinking OMG, how much effort they went to building those toys! There is no way that would produce useful results, especially in just 10 generations. The model is simply too crude, and 10 generations is absurdly brief to expect useful results with this set up.

        I have spent years playing with genetic algorithms, and I have learned a great deal from them. You can never underestimate the effects of chance, and I found it takes thousands of generations to continuously break out of local

  • unprocessed fishsticks

Slashdot Top Deals

"Virtual" means never knowing where your next byte is coming from.

Close