3 ms·

Cambrian Explosion is a bit of a misnomer because it leads people to think it was unique with respect to evolutionary processes. There is a push to call it the

Cambrian Explosion is a bit of a misnomer because it leads people to think it was unique with respect to evolutionary processes. There is a push to call it the Cambrian Radiation [0]. Throughout complex life's time on Earth there have been multiple periods of rapid evolutionary development similar to the Cambrian. A blurb about the Cambrian Radiation appears in my coffee table picture book [1]. [0]: https://impacts.to/bibliography.pdf#page=41 https://impacts.to/bibliography.pdf#page=41 [1]: https://impacts.to/downloads/lowres/impacts.pdf#page=15 https://impacts.to/downloads/lowres/impacts.pdf#page=15

mkl 5y ago
"Radiation" sounds more unique than "explosion" to me (not an evolutionary biologist). It sounds like it means there was some unusual atomic radiation causing mutations at that time, so I think it will lead to more misunderstanding by laypeople rather than less. Why did they decide not to have multiple "explosions"? Your book looks really interesting!
- adrian_b 5y ago
  "Radiation" is meant to suggest that the evolution advanced in many very different directions, like the rays that diverge from a point. Such "radiations" have happened every time when there was little competition either because a new place or environment was invaded or because a catastrophe had eliminated the former incumbents. The result of evolution "radiations" was that some group of animals that previously had been more or less uniform because they were adapted to a certain niche, after the "radiation" event became diversified in a large number of groups adapted to very different conditions of life and having much less resemblance between themselves than before.
  - mkl 5y ago
    Yes I understand what it means, but the word "radiation" has other much more well-known meanings, one of which directly connects to having more mutations than usual, so it's bound to be misunderstood.
    - adrian_b 5y ago
      You are right about the risk of misunderstanding the word "radiation". However, the same risk applies to "explosion". It is probably better to not use metaphors like "radiation" or "explosion", but to just say something like "diversification event". However, "radiation" already has a long history of being used in the biological literature with this particular meaning, of divergent evolution, so for those familiar with the jargon, it seems an appropriate choice, even if it might not be the best word to use in something intended for the general public. The "radiation" events are not events when the rate of mutations was higher (even if it is likely that the mutation rate during Cambrian was a little higher than today, due to higher ambient radioactivity because less of the primordial radioactive nuclides had already decayed by then). The "radiation" events were events where a much larger proportion of mutants survived enough to have descendants, because of less competition that would have otherwise eliminated them. This allowed a chain of neutral or bad mutations to lead eventually to improved organisms for certain conditions of life, while in the times of high competition it would have been impossible to escape local optima. So while the rate of "raw" mutations was about the same as in other times, the rate of successful mutations, that persisted in the DNA of the descendants, was higher.
      - ASalazarMX 5y ago
        Maybe Cambrian diversification/surge would be a more neutral name?
dotancohen 5y ago
This book looks fantastic - just perfect to capture the interest of the layman. If it ever get translated to my language it is going on my coffee table as well. Did you coin the term Cambrian Radiation? Though I agree that the term Cambrian Explosion may mislead, I fear that the term Cambrian Radiation might confuse. If a new term is to be coined, wouldn't Cambrian Diversification be an obvious choice?
- inkyoto 5y ago
  I fear that the term Cambrian Radiation might confuse I have surmised the OP actually meant Cambrian Radiance, not radiation. Autocomplete might have been complicit.
  - zeven7 5y ago
    Radiance sounds so much better than radiation
  - thangalin 5y ago
    Search for "radiation" and "radiance" in the book's bibliography: https://impacts.to/bibliography.pdf https://impacts.to/bibliography.pdf
- thangalin 5y ago
  A printed version costs about $150 to produce, which includes $15 that goes to the illustrators. Translating to other languages would be a technical challenge. I didn't coin the term Cambrian Radiation; you can find the phrase referenced by biologists many times throughout the book's bibliography: https://impacts.to/bibliography.pdf https://impacts.to/bibliography.pdf
  - dotancohen 5y ago
    I see, thank you for the details.

mkl 5y ago

"Radiation" sounds more unique than "explosion" to me (not an evolutionary biologist). It sounds like it means there was some unusual atomic radiation causing mutations at that time, so I think it will lead to more misunderstanding by laypeople rather than less. Why did they decide not to have multiple "explosions"? Your book looks really interesting!

adrian_b 5y ago
"Radiation" is meant to suggest that the evolution advanced in many very different directions, like the rays that diverge from a point. Such "radiations" have happened every time when there was little competition either because a new place or environment was invaded or because a catastrophe had eliminated the former incumbents. The result of evolution "radiations" was that some group of animals that previously had been more or less uniform because they were adapted to a certain niche, after the "radiation" event became diversified in a large number of groups adapted to very different conditions of life and having much less resemblance between themselves than before.
- mkl 5y ago
  Yes I understand what it means, but the word "radiation" has other much more well-known meanings, one of which directly connects to having more mutations than usual, so it's bound to be misunderstood.
  - adrian_b 5y ago
    You are right about the risk of misunderstanding the word "radiation". However, the same risk applies to "explosion". It is probably better to not use metaphors like "radiation" or "explosion", but to just say something like "diversification event". However, "radiation" already has a long history of being used in the biological literature with this particular meaning, of divergent evolution, so for those familiar with the jargon, it seems an appropriate choice, even if it might not be the best word to use in something intended for the general public. The "radiation" events are not events when the rate of mutations was higher (even if it is likely that the mutation rate during Cambrian was a little higher than today, due to higher ambient radioactivity because less of the primordial radioactive nuclides had already decayed by then). The "radiation" events were events where a much larger proportion of mutants survived enough to have descendants, because of less competition that would have otherwise eliminated them. This allowed a chain of neutral or bad mutations to lead eventually to improved organisms for certain conditions of life, while in the times of high competition it would have been impossible to escape local optima. So while the rate of "raw" mutations was about the same as in other times, the rate of successful mutations, that persisted in the DNA of the descendants, was higher.
    - ASalazarMX 5y ago
      Maybe Cambrian diversification/surge would be a more neutral name?

dotancohen 5y ago

This book looks fantastic - just perfect to capture the interest of the layman. If it ever get translated to my language it is going on my coffee table as well. Did you coin the term Cambrian Radiation? Though I agree that the term Cambrian Explosion may mislead, I fear that the term Cambrian Radiation might confuse. If a new term is to be coined, wouldn't Cambrian Diversification be an obvious choice?

inkyoto 5y ago
I fear that the term Cambrian Radiation might confuse I have surmised the OP actually meant Cambrian Radiance, not radiation. Autocomplete might have been complicit.
- zeven7 5y ago
  Radiance sounds so much better than radiation
- thangalin 5y ago
  Search for "radiation" and "radiance" in the book's bibliography: https://impacts.to/bibliography.pdf https://impacts.to/bibliography.pdf
thangalin 5y ago
A printed version costs about $150 to produce, which includes $15 that goes to the illustrators. Translating to other languages would be a technical challenge. I didn't coin the term Cambrian Radiation; you can find the phrase referenced by biologists many times throughout the book's bibliography: https://impacts.to/bibliography.pdf https://impacts.to/bibliography.pdf
- dotancohen 5y ago
  I see, thank you for the details.