4 ms·

Inter-species mating could doom polar bear

14 points by dkasper 16y ago

makmanalp 16y ago
Actual article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/environmentclimatewarmingspeciesarcticbear http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/environmentclimatewarmingspecies...
- Groxx 16y ago
  They say "pizzlies", but I like the OP's "grolar bear" much better. They seem scandalized, or maybe robbed, by this. It's a survival tactic. It's working. Sheesh. Let them do what they do, the natural thing, instead of trying to preserve a too-small gene pool.
- Mz 16y ago
  tl; dr "Polar bears are interbreeding with grizzlies because their habitat is disappearing. This is tragic and the new bears are doomed because they are poorly adapted to polar bear habitat. This wouldn't be so bad if humans weren't at fault."
Swizec 16y ago
So what exactly is so worrying or shockingly new about what essentially boils down to evolution?
- sukuriant 16y ago
  I suspect adaptation might be a better term. Mutations aren't causing this or doing anything (so far as I know) with this, it's merely two creatures breeding and their gene pools intermingling.
  - Swizec 16y ago
    That's still evolution. It's just a matter of changing genes to produce something new and then selecting the best outcomes. Whether the change happens randomly or because two organisms combined their DNA, is irrelevant.
    - sukuriant 16y ago
      I stand corrected. A quick glance at Wikipedia showed your correctness. Apologies.
iwwr 16y ago
Under what conditions is a species considered distinct from species with which it can form reproductively-viable offspring?
- presidentender 16y ago
  The species distinction is often made when two populations of otherwise compatible creatures do not reproduce due to time, location, or physiological factors. In this case, geography has historically kept Grizzlies and Polar Bears separate, so their physical features have diverged a great deal despite remaining sexually compatible. In other cases, different mating seasons or physiological incompatibility might prevent breeding, even though the gametes are compatible. Coyotes and wolves and dogs can breed, for instance, but they usually don't and so they're considered separate species. The mathematician in me hates this abuse of what should be an absolute and well-defined term, and the cynic wonders about eugenicists making a species distinction between the various human lineages.
sukuriant 16y ago
Two things: Creationists (to which I believe the middle of the Posterous article was referring) shouldn't be upset at all. The Bible says kinds, not species, and that kinds can and do mate. Two: why try to cull the mixing? If it's working (and isn't the operation of natural selection all about discouraging what doesn't work?) why try to put a human hand in the activity? Are we so desperately trying to retain what we define as species?
- Groxx 16y ago
  Neh, I think the OP was just amusing themselves a bit too much with sex jokes / remarks / one-liners. (though how could it be taken as incestual? It's kinda the exact opposite)
  - dguaraglia 16y ago
    LOL, indeed, came here to point that out. It's like saying "he's a pedophile because he's into grannies".
    - Groxx 16y ago
      I suppose the connection could be "brother from another mother"?
- dawgr 16y ago
  You are right, we shouldn't interfere with nature but to me if the polar bear is lost through interbreeding it would be a loss. It's like mixing two good perfumes or two good wines, the uniqueness of each is lost to get only one unique thing.
- mkross 16y ago
  I assume the reason to stop is due to a feeling of guilt. Instead of considering human influence as a part of nature, many people consider it to be some sort of perversion. So instead of being amazed by the adaptability of life, people feel guilty about causing changes. Plus there is the whole time scale thing. The fact that evolution took a really long time to differentiate polar and grizzly bears and in a few lifetimes you would see that split undone is concerning.
DanielBMarkham 16y ago
Shouldn't the article title be just the opposite? "Polar bears assure survival with inter-species mating" Wonder why people always want nothing to change? Seems like a strange thing found in folks of all religions and philosophies. This sounds like great news: life carries on. Such a great story and such a sucky title.
joeycfan 16y ago
I'm pretty sure the Polar Bear Klan will put a stop to all this race mixing.
Mz 16y ago
I am reminded of a cartoon in one of my environmental studies college texts. (IIRC:) The cartoon depicted a colony of bacteria on pre-historic earth having hissy fits and NIMBY-like protests that their off-gassing of oxygen was destroying the environment and would soon endanger the survival of their species if something wasn't done about it.

14 points by dkasper 16y ago

Actual article: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/environmentclimatewarmingspeciesarcticbear http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/environmentclimatewarmingspecies...

Groxx 16y ago
They say "pizzlies", but I like the OP's "grolar bear" much better. They seem scandalized, or maybe robbed, by this. It's a survival tactic. It's working. Sheesh. Let them do what they do, the natural thing, instead of trying to preserve a too-small gene pool.
Mz 16y ago
tl; dr "Polar bears are interbreeding with grizzlies because their habitat is disappearing. This is tragic and the new bears are doomed because they are poorly adapted to polar bear habitat. This wouldn't be so bad if humans weren't at fault."

Swizec 16y ago

So what exactly is so worrying or shockingly new about what essentially boils down to evolution?

sukuriant 16y ago
I suspect adaptation might be a better term. Mutations aren't causing this or doing anything (so far as I know) with this, it's merely two creatures breeding and their gene pools intermingling.
- Swizec 16y ago
  That's still evolution. It's just a matter of changing genes to produce something new and then selecting the best outcomes. Whether the change happens randomly or because two organisms combined their DNA, is irrelevant.
  - sukuriant 16y ago
    I stand corrected. A quick glance at Wikipedia showed your correctness. Apologies.

iwwr 16y ago

Under what conditions is a species considered distinct from species with which it can form reproductively-viable offspring?

presidentender 16y ago
The species distinction is often made when two populations of otherwise compatible creatures do not reproduce due to time, location, or physiological factors. In this case, geography has historically kept Grizzlies and Polar Bears separate, so their physical features have diverged a great deal despite remaining sexually compatible. In other cases, different mating seasons or physiological incompatibility might prevent breeding, even though the gametes are compatible. Coyotes and wolves and dogs can breed, for instance, but they usually don't and so they're considered separate species. The mathematician in me hates this abuse of what should be an absolute and well-defined term, and the cynic wonders about eugenicists making a species distinction between the various human lineages.

sukuriant 16y ago

Two things: Creationists (to which I believe the middle of the Posterous article was referring) shouldn't be upset at all. The Bible says kinds, not species, and that kinds can and do mate. Two: why try to cull the mixing? If it's working (and isn't the operation of natural selection all about discouraging what doesn't work?) why try to put a human hand in the activity? Are we so desperately trying to retain what we define as species?

Groxx 16y ago
Neh, I think the OP was just amusing themselves a bit too much with sex jokes / remarks / one-liners. (though how could it be taken as incestual? It's kinda the exact opposite)
- dguaraglia 16y ago
  LOL, indeed, came here to point that out. It's like saying "he's a pedophile because he's into grannies".
  - Groxx 16y ago
    I suppose the connection could be "brother from another mother"?
dawgr 16y ago
You are right, we shouldn't interfere with nature but to me if the polar bear is lost through interbreeding it would be a loss. It's like mixing two good perfumes or two good wines, the uniqueness of each is lost to get only one unique thing.
mkross 16y ago
I assume the reason to stop is due to a feeling of guilt. Instead of considering human influence as a part of nature, many people consider it to be some sort of perversion. So instead of being amazed by the adaptability of life, people feel guilty about causing changes. Plus there is the whole time scale thing. The fact that evolution took a really long time to differentiate polar and grizzly bears and in a few lifetimes you would see that split undone is concerning.

DanielBMarkham 16y ago

Shouldn't the article title be just the opposite? "Polar bears assure survival with inter-species mating" Wonder why people always want nothing to change? Seems like a strange thing found in folks of all religions and philosophies. This sounds like great news: life carries on. Such a great story and such a sucky title.

joeycfan 16y ago

I'm pretty sure the Polar Bear Klan will put a stop to all this race mixing.

Mz 16y ago

I am reminded of a cartoon in one of my environmental studies college texts. (IIRC:) The cartoon depicted a colony of bacteria on pre-historic earth having hissy fits and NIMBY-like protests that their off-gassing of oxygen was destroying the environment and would soon endanger the survival of their species if something wasn't done about it.