Evolution Experiment: Creationists, Choose their Fate!

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Adaptation does not equal evolution.
Adaptation is a conservative process.
Evolution requires the acquisition of new traits the the encoding of them into the reproductive system.
Let me know when you change the skeletal structure from exoskeleton to endoskeleton.
 
Upvote 0

pshun2404

Newbie
Jan 26, 2012
6,026
620
✟78,299.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Actually, changing the gene pool demonstrably does have a long term impact on a species, ourselves included. We just have an ethical issue with how the Nazis tried to do it, as well as a procedural issue with it. Any time you try to breed for specific traits in a population, you inevitably lose some genetic diversity. The genetic diversity lost could include genes for resistances to diseases that don't yet exist, which puts the population at a greater risk of being eliminated through illness.

Plus, you wouldn't actually have to kill anyone to improve the overall health of humanity; all one would have to do is look at the patterns of inheritance for various genetic diseases. People with the autosomal dominant or X-linked recessive deadly diseases could simply be informed, and this would likely influence their reproductive choices (most people would have fewer kids of their own free will if they risked passing down Huntington's disease, for example). Otherwise, a great way to reduce recessive diseases is to have kids with people as genetically dissimilar to you as humanly possible, and one of the easiest ways to tell if someone has a different genetic background than you is to note if their race is different. That's right, racial purity is complete garbage, as far as evolution is concerned.

Now we are getting close to the technology necessary to remove the most harmful genes from a person's genome while they are still developing, subverting genetic risk via lineage entirely. And once removed, they won't risk passing it down to future generations either.

So, the Nazi way is unnecessarily cruel, and counterproductive. What they were actually doing would have just produced a genetic bottleneck, reducing some genetic diseases, but ultimately making way for others to become more common and increase damage from future epidemics, at the cost of an extreme loss of life.

"Actually, changing the gene pool demonstrably does have a long term impact on a species, ourselves included."

I was being rhetorical Sarah the point was that Hitler himself (let alone many of his cohorts) believed in evolution. That does not mean "evolution theory" is evil or any such foolishness and yes it is all about application and separation of what we actually know from what we conjecture these possibilities mean. Where does one draw the line between where the belief interprets and defines the data, and where the data gets to shape the hypothesis based belief?
 
Upvote 0

Bugeyedcreepy

Well-Known Member
Jun 7, 2016
1,660
1,431
Canberra, Australia
✟88,248.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I have to agree Sarah, I have also debated and discussed such things with many creationists who are as dogmatic that such things NEVER happened as there are evolutionists who are as dogmatic that fish DID IN FACT become amphibians that became reptiles that became mammals and so on. It is very difficult to open the closed mind.
but the difference is that scientifically verifiable evidence would change our minds. Creationists on the other hand refuse to recognise evidence that doesn't conform to their previously held beliefs. Probably should start a thread or go converse on another thread since this thread is specifically for @PsychoSarah 's evolution experiment and not for you to deny reality.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Where does one draw the line between where the belief interprets and defines the data, and where the data gets to shape the hypothesis based belief?
A person's beliefs should be set aside from the interpretation of data as much as possible. Furthermore, data will either support a hypothesis, or it won't support it, simple as that. How people determine which results would support a given hypothesis isn't arbitrary. Also, a hypothesis isn't a good basis to believe in anything; every hypothesis is testable by definition, but that doesn't mean that every hypothesis has been tested.

Data doesn't quite shape a hypothesis either. At least, not in the way you seem to be implying. When data doesn't support the hypothesis that the experiments were run to test, usually that hypothesis gets scrapped and replaced.

To make it all the more clear that personal beliefs aren't allowed to get in the way of data interpretation, most experiments have multiple people work together to interpret the data, and even more people will be doing repeats of the original experiment and interpreting the data they get for themselves. If it all collectively agrees consistently with enough trials, said hypothesis can graduate to theory status.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
I have to agree Sarah, I have also debated and discussed such things with many creationists who are as dogmatic that such things NEVER happened as there are evolutionists who are as dogmatic that fish DID IN FACT become amphibians that became reptiles that became mammals and so on. It is very difficult to open the closed mind.
So are you going to participate in the experiment or not? All you have to do is pick 2 traits out of the 6 I listed in the OP. Performing the experiment alongside me is entirely optional, and mostly for the benefit of people that really do think there is some evolution conspiracy or just don't consider me trustworthy... for whatever reason.

Also, for anyone that does want to perform the experiment, but would rather it proceed via natural selection, feel free to post as much, and I can help you design environments that would make certain trends beneficial enough to alter the evolutionary path of an experimental group. After all, people doing this experiment for themselves don't have to select for the same traits as I am.

However, for the sake of the sanity of people, I am going to relist the traits, but this time, I am going to put them in order of easiest to hardest to select for, and state why they are easy/hard to select for:
Less color: the mutation for albinism exists in Triops, and appears in populations frequently enough that a person could reasonably luck out with a random mutation. The recessive nature of this trait also makes it easy to make the population entirely true breeding for it within just a couple generations.
Longer tails: if you are using the same species as myself, you'll notice that their tails are rather short, so lots of room for change here.
More color: The ease here is more a matter of the fact that it's an easy trait to just glance at the Triops and separate them by it without any measuring. This would actually happen to be the easiest trait to set up an experiment via natural selection for, as all you would have to do is use black sand in the terrarium and let your cat have free access to the tank.
Wide bodies: First trait on the list that could actually harm the Triops to have. It might impact how well they move negatively. Plus, you have to be really precise with the measuring tape for this one. However, I doubt this could result in death or infertility.
Shorter tails: The difficulty mostly applies to the species I specifically chose, in that their tails are already quite short. There's not much room between shorter and a lack of a tail here. They also have their egg sacs at the base of the tail, so it is possible that shorter tails will result in fertility issues.
Narrow bodies: Gosh, it is just a nightmare waiting to happen. I do not know how much narrower Triops could get before their internal organs begin to suffer worse than a Victorian era woman addicted to corsets. This would inevitably limit how many eggs they can produce at a time as well, which is not good for an evolution experiment. After all, you want as large of a population as you can maintain. I would highly suggest that if anyone really, really wants to select for this trait that they also select for larger Triops.

Now that I have laid out exactly how to make this experiment more likely to succeed/fail, I wonder if I will get some more creationist interest... or people being trolls.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Adaptation does not equal evolution.
Adaptation is a conservative process.

Adaptation: in biology, process by which an animal or plant species becomes fitted to its environment; it is the result of natural selection's acting upon heritable variation. Adaptation is a consequence of evolution.


Evolution requires the acquisition of new traits the the encoding of them into the reproductive system.
Nope, changes in trends for already existing variation within a population is also evolution. Not that it matters, considering that mutation does produce new traits.


Let me know when you change the skeletal structure from exoskeleton to endoskeleton.
Sounds redundant and silly, considering the fact that no one is arguing that organisms with endoskeletons evolved from organisms with exoskeletons. Once you have one, you don't need the other; both evolved from organisms that didn't have skeletons.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
^-^ the eggs arrived yesterday. I poured about half of them into a hatching bin; hopefully, I get them to hatch. If not, I need to increase the heat and change out the water. I'll be able to test if my camera is good enough to take pictures of hatchlings in a day or two if they do hatch. F1 generation, go go go!

Unfortunately, due to the small number of eggs I am starting with, the F1 generation will not experience the experimental conditions. I bought 50 eggs, but the hatch rate for this species can be as low as 1/4, so I need all of these guys to produce more eggs to get the population up a bit. The experiment starts with the F2 generation.

That leaves about 2 more weeks for people to vote on the traits they want to see.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Ugh, for the life of me, I can't seem to get these eggs to hatch. My grandmother keeps her house too cold to not use a heater, and when I use a heater, the things still don't want to hatch because it gets just a little too warm. I'm going to try a different species, guys.

Triops granarius is my second pick, given that it is temperature that seems to be getting in the way of the eggs hatching. They have the most forgiving temperature range of any Triops species, being comfortable at 22-27 degrees Celsius (about 72-80 degrees F). My heater caps out at 78 degrees, so this should be perfect for them (the species I was going to do survives at 25 C or 77 F at most). This wouldn't be such a problem if my grandmother didn't like her house to be at 18 C (about 65 F). I had heard T. cancriformis could survive that temperature, but apparently, it won't hatch at it, and this just won't do.

"So Sarah, if this other species is so flexible, why not pick it in the first place". I do have a few reasons:
1. The entire species is gendered rather than having hermaphrodites, which limits how severe of selection pressures I can put on the experimental population. It's simple to gender them once they are mature, but I'd have to let the population in the experimental tank be at least 3 males and 3 females, for reason number 2...
2. This species is more prone to cannibalism; the last thing I want is for months of selective breeding to be compromised because the test subjects decided to eat each other. This also means I have to keep a better feeding schedule (3 times a day instead of 2 times a day).
3. They are harder to come by. I have to order this one from a distant country, as there are no local breeders of this species. Thankfully, they aren't hugely more expensive, though.
4. They are a bit larger than most Triops species. The species I originally tried ranges from 4-6 cm, while this alternative species ranges from 8-10 cm. For those not using the metric system, the original species was between 1.5-2.4 inches, and the alternative species is 3-4 inches long. That's a huge difference in size.
5. This species has gender dimorphism. Females are larger and lighter in color, so I have to be especially careful not to mistakenly put a bunch of males in the experimental tank and no females.

As for some good news, I'll be starting out with 150 eggs instead of 50 this time. -_- hatch this time, darn it.

triops_granarius_sexe.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Chriliman

Everything I need to be joyful is right here
May 22, 2015
5,895
569
✟163,501.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Are you a creationist? Are you skeptical of the theory of evolution? Do you think it has never been observed and all the experiments and observations are either interpreted incorrectly or are the product of a global conspiracy? Well, now's your chance to be involved in an evolution experiment yourself!

The experimental subjects are Triops, little crustaceans that have generation times of less than a month.

634px-triops-longicaudatus-dorsal-ventral-edit.jpg


"But Sarah, I don't want to take care of any gross looking vermin". No worries, I'm going to take care of these guys for you.

"But Sarah, I actually do want some Triops and to do the experiment directly with my own hands". No problem, Triops are very easy to care for, and the great part about experiments is that they are repeatable. So, as long as you do what I do, you'll get results!

"So Sarah, exactly how are we involved in the experiment?" An excellent question. What you'll be doing is acting as "natural selection". You decide what traits should "improve survival", and which ones won't. This will be determined by vote: make a post with the 2 traits you want our experimental population to develop, and I'll change the conditions to those which would result in that trait being favored gradually enough that we don't just kill off the whole population.

Here are the traits you can select, and be sure not to pick contradictory ones!
Longer tails
Shorter tails
Wide bodies
Narrow bodies
More color
Less color

"But Sarah, they'll still be Triops, and that's not evolution". I'm not going to argue about what evolution is with anyone in this particular thread; however, this experiment will continue until the experimental population and the control population are recognizably distinct from each other, or when the control population and the experimental population can no longer interbreed. "How long do you think that'd take, Sarah?" Years; I'm prepared to continue this experiment for a decade, posting the current progress every month on this site. This is probably going to be an aspect of my master's thesis.

"Sarah, are any Triops going to be killed because they don't have the traits we asked for?" Nope, the ones that don't exhibit the traits are put into a third tank. They can't be put into the control tank, though, because that'd likely skew the gene pool of that population to favor the opposite qualities of the experimental tank, which would make the results in the experimental tank seem more drastic than they really were. However, in case the control tank does have some genetic anomalies, I am going to carefully measure members of the first 2 generations to make sure the original average bodies are recorded.

So, any creationists want to have some fun with evolution?

This is very interesting thanks for doing this.

Would this also be demonstrating how God might of evolved initial life? Albeit, without demonstrating the initial creation of life from non-life material...?
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
This is very interesting thanks for doing this.

Would this also be demonstrating how God might of evolved initial life? Albeit, without demonstrating the initial creation of life from non-life material...?
Perhaps, if one believes that a deity initially created simple life, and evolution as a mechanism designed by said deity for life to develop and change with.

Though, if you find it interesting, why not vote for 2 out of 6 traits listed in the OP for me to select for? The vote is still quite close for various traits, and I would greatly appreciate it if you voted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chriliman
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Divide

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2017
2,577
1,231
61
Columbus
✟81,201.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I'm not 100% against evolution. I believe that God may have designed things to evolve after they were created. Now that's just a speculation of mine. I also think it's possible that when evolution happens and something big happens to a species, that God himself may have a direct hand in it. Scripture does say that all things consist by Him. So maybe He makes changes at times?

I'm not sure either way. But I would like to see if you can get them to be more colorful.

And shorter tails with no knives involved, lol.
 
Upvote 0

Willby

Active Member
Oct 29, 2017
35
29
50
London
✟16,925.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
I have to agree Sarah, I have also debated and discussed such things with many creationists who are as dogmatic that such things NEVER happened as there are evolutionists who are as dogmatic that fish DID IN FACT become amphibians that became reptiles that became mammals and so on. It is very difficult to open the closed mind.

Both would be wrong but one is 'less' wrong.

Those actually versed in biology will almost universally tell you that the evidence (*) supports extant fish, amphibians and mammal etc having common ancestry. That the common ancestor of amphibians and reptiles was more recent then the one of all three. How the ancestor of amphibians would have resembled what we typically call a fish etc.
They will then probably drift off into a discusion about clades and why fish isn't one as its polyphyletic and so on.
If you then looked confused and pressed them they might dumb it down as fish becoming amphibians etc.

* And I mean all the evidence, anatomy, genetic, fossil (**), biogeography etc. It's as close to 'DID IN FACT' as it can reasonably get.

** T.roseae is just the icing on the cake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Ok I'll play. I am a creationist.

I want to see more color and shorter tails.

Can I pick the colors? Or patterns?

I want to see some brighter colors in them.

And shorter tails just because
I interpret "more color" as more pigment in general. Since these organisms start out as a sort of sandy color, that leaves a lot of room for potential colors via mutation. However, since mutation is not guided, I can't guarantee any specific colors will appear, only a trend from the sandy color to something else.

The most likely colors to appear are red (happened in a different species of Triops from the one I am using, though), green, and blue. I'm crossing my fingers for purple and black, personally.

A color pattern would be a separate mutation entirely, and it is actually difficult enough as it is to select for 2 different, unrelated traits. However, if you wish to perform the experiment yourself, I can guide you on how to select for that. It is possible that by random luck, the experimental population will have a color pattern mutation, and I wouldn't exile it from the population if that did happen.

Thank you for your votes, good sir.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Divide

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2017
2,577
1,231
61
Columbus
✟81,201.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I interpret "more color" as more pigment in general. Since these organisms start out as a sort of sandy color, that leaves a lot of room for potential colors via mutation. However, since mutation is not guided, I can't guarantee any specific colors will appear, only a trend from the sandy color to something else.

The most likely colors to appear are red (happened in a different species of Triops from the one I am using, though), green, and blue. I'm crossing my fingers for purple and black, personally.

A color pattern would be a separate mutation entirely, and it is actually difficult enough as it is to select for 2 different, unrelated traits. However, if you wish to perform the experiment yourself, I can guide you on how to select for that. It is possible that by random luck, the experimental population will have a color pattern mutation, and I wouldn't exile it from the population if that did happen.

Thank you for your votes, good sir.

I'll buy that. I was actually thinking red or blue. Patterns would be nice but it's pretty reasonable to have it fall out without a pattern. If it was too patternized then you could be accused of airbrushing, lol.

So any kind of hippy dippy surrealistic whatever is cool. However it falls out. Why would purple or black be harder?

I have so much going on in my life right now that there's no way I could hope to be able to set up tanks and care for little tadpole dudes. Maybe later some time when things stabilize more for me (if they do!) I could, but right now it'd be asking too much and I know it. You however are on top of it and all setup already and so we'll go with you and your setup.

Could you perhaps post a pic or three of your tank setups? That would be kind of cool to see your setup. Perhaps even a general idea of how much a setup would cost, because, I like experimenting, and it might be cool for something to do in the future. Or maybe I could start collecting a piece at a time or something in prep.

You've probably already posted this, but my memory isn't so great (too many years as a pothead I guess), so let me ask you, what is your end goal in this experiment? What do you hope to achieve?

I find it a little odd that you've had a hard time getting participation from creationists. This is very cool, and whatever the outcome, we're all bound to learn something.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy D
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
I'll buy that. I was actually thinking red or blue. Patterns would be nice but it's pretty reasonable to have it fall out without a pattern. If it was too patternized then you could be accused of airbrushing, lol.

So any kind of hippy dippy surrealistic whatever is cool. However it falls out. Why would purple or black be harder?
Pfft, so help me if people accuse me of airbrushing, I'll send them some eggs to hatch if they think I am enhancing the color. Funnily enough, the pictures taken by my garbage camera have their color somewhat muted, so the images are going to err in the less colorful direction.

Purple and black would be less likely, because the Triops don't produce any purple or black pigments, in the case of the species I am using for "attempting to hatch, take two". Red is a color mutation that has appeared in at least 2 different species before, so there is a decent chance that the mutation that causes it is rather simple and on a shared gene between all members of the genus. Same goes with green, albeit with just a specific population of a different species. Triops do produce a blue pigment... in their muscles, so it is possible for a mutation to cause that to be expressed in their exoskeletons.

Basically, purple would be an entirely new color for which there isn't any precedent in this species of Triops, so the presence of this color would have to be caused by a unique mutation, and black contrasts the most with the color they start out as.

I have so much going on in my life right now that there's no way I could hope to be able to set up tanks and care for little tadpole dudes. Maybe later some time when things stabilize more for me (if they do!) I could, but right now it'd be asking too much and I know it. You however are on top of it and all setup already and so we'll go with you and your setup.
I don't blame you on that; while Triops aren't demanding to take care of, they must be fed at least 3 times a day to avoid a notable risk of cannibalism. Unless you use Triops cancriformis, like I tried to do originally (eggs wouldn't hatch). I really wish those eggs had hatched, because using a gendered species makes me very stressed about their potential to eat each other.

Could you perhaps post a pic or three of your tank setups? That would be kind of cool to see your setup. Perhaps even a general idea of how much a setup would cost, because, I like experimenting, and it might be cool for something to do in the future. Or maybe I could start collecting a piece at a time or something in prep.
I will do that later; unfortunately for me, two of the tanks I bought have bad seals and leak, so I have to fix them. However, this image is representative of a bare-bones Triops tank (no filter, no heater) https://fotoalbum.dds.nl/vagevuur/aquarium/medium/IMG_2858.JPG . If one keeps it under 70 degrees in their house at any point, they should use a heater, because I found out the hard way that Triops eggs, even of the most cold tolerant species easily available, will not hatch at 65 degrees. That's 21 and 18 degrees Celsius, respectively. I'm going to be using distilled water, even though adults can tolerate tap water that's treated to remove the chlorine and other stuff they don't like, since that's actually cheaper than treating the water is and babies won't hatch in tap water with as high of a ppm as I have. I use baking soda to control the pH (distilled water is acidic), and you can buy pH strips at any pet store. As long as the pH is greater than 6 and less than 10, it's all good (though, they prefer it if it is 7-9). A ridiculously generous range for an aquatic organism.

My tanks will look more like this, since I decided to have heaters and filters, and I am not huge on decorations for the tank (aside from a marimo or two) http://i.imgur.com/AFGEbKQ.jpg . For organisms like this, I highly recommend double sponge filters like the one in the picture. It's the same as the one I am going to use, and the benefit of having two sponges is that you can clean one at a time to prevent the tank from cycling again, and they're fairly cheap.

You've probably already posted this, but my memory isn't so great (too many years as a pothead I guess), so let me ask you, what is your end goal in this experiment? What do you hope to achieve?
I hope I get to watch evolution in action, I suppose. Though, I would be fine with there being absolutely no change in the Triops. The purpose was more to design an evolution experiment anyone could do which didn't involve bacteria than to want a specific outcome. No high-end, expensive equipment. No high maintenance organisms. No waiting a lifetime for results, and no need for a huge amount of space. Would it be awesome to have three 100 gallon tanks dedicated to this, and would it make for better results? Absolutely, but who has the time and money to throw around for that? I certainly don't. Heck, I'll lay out the costs of all the stuff I got right now, in USD:
eggs: $5-20, depends on species and number of eggs. $5 will get you 50 eggs of the most common species. I spent about $13 for 150 Triops granarius eggs, which also included enough food for 2 months. Do note that only 1/4 Triops eggs usually hatch, so it's a bad idea to just buy 10 eggs, which is what the kits for kids usually come with.
tanks: about $36 for three 10 gallon tanks. If I went through yard sales, I'd probably find bigger ones cheaper, because the resale value of tanks is garbage.
filter: $10 for the filter parts, about $20 for the air pumps and tubes needed to get the filters to work (DX argggh, why aren't they sold together?!)
50 watt tank heaters: $21 for three adjustable ones with a range of 65-88 degrees F, 18-31 degrees C.
sand: $15 for enough to last years, possibly the duration of the experiment.

So, that makes my personal total about $115 for the whole set up, but I am going above and beyond. Considering that heaters aren't inherently necessary for everyone to get the eggs to hatch, and considering that filters are never an absolute necessity, it could have been as low as $64. That, and plenty of people probably have some leftover tank stuff from pets they've had before.

I find it a little odd that you've had a hard time getting participation from creationists. This is very cool, and whatever the outcome, we're all bound to learn something.
I have no idea why they don't want to vote for traits. Yes, 10 years is a long time, I doubt most of them will still be active by the time the experiment is completed, but based on some basic math, it's likely that the experimental population will be noticeably different from the control group in less than 2 years. That's a pretty short amount of time for an evolution experiment, honestly. Especially for a multicellular organism; most of those span multiple decades and are indefinitely ongoing.
 
Upvote 0

Divide

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2017
2,577
1,231
61
Columbus
✟81,201.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Pfft, so help me if people accuse me of airbrushing, I'll send them some eggs to hatch if they think I am enhancing the color. Funnily enough, the pictures taken by my garbage camera have their color somewhat muted, so the images are going to err in the less colorful direction.

Aha, got you. Where's your documentation, sources that your camera has muted color? Lol, No, I'm just kidding. I'm not like some others who demand proof absolute about absolutely everything. Lol. I'll take your word for it. My camera is a little weird too.

Purple and black would be less likely, because the Triops don't produce any purple or black pigments, in the case of the species I am using for "attempting to hatch, take two". Red is a color mutation that has appeared in at least 2 different species before, so there is a decent chance that the mutation that causes it is rather simple and on a shared gene between all members of the genus. Same goes with green, albeit with just a specific population of a different species. Triops do produce a blue pigment... in their muscles, so it is possible for a mutation to cause that to be expressed in their exoskeletons.

Basically, purple would be an entirely new color for which there isn't any precedent in this species of Triops, so the presence of this color would have to be caused by a unique mutation, and black contrasts the most with the color they start out as.

Ok...

I will do that later; unfortunately for me, two of the tanks I bought have bad seals and leak, so I have to fix them.

What? You can fix them too? Intelligent and mechanically inclined? I'm impressed. How come the hubby wont fix them for you? Lol. J/K.

I will do that later; unfortunately for me, two of the tanks I bought have bad seals and leak, so I have to fix them. However, this image is representative of a bare-bones Triops tank (no filter, no heater) https://fotoalbum.dds.nl/vagevuur/aquarium/medium/IMG_2858.JPG . If one keeps it under 70 degrees in their house at any point, they should use a heater, because I found out the hard way that Triops eggs, even of the most cold tolerant species easily available, will not hatch at 65 degrees. That's 21 and 18 degrees Celsius, respectively. I'm going to be using distilled water, even though adults can tolerate tap water that's treated to remove the chlorine and other stuff they don't like, since that's actually cheaper than treating the water is and babies won't hatch in tap water with as high of a ppm as I have. I use baking soda to control the pH (distilled water is acidic), and you can buy pH strips at any pet store. As long as the pH is greater than 6 and less than 10, it's all good (though, they prefer it if it is 7-9). A ridiculously generous range for an aquatic organism.

Oh that's just a big fish tank. had envisioned some sort of specialized stainless steel tank for some reason. I've never had good luck with fish though, lol. My niece doesn't either. Man, her last tax check she wasted on 2500 bucks worth of nice tank and expensive fish...and 2 grand worth of fish died within a week or so! Whoa.

My tanks will look more like this, since I decided to have heaters and filters, and I am not huge on decorations for the tank (aside from a marimo or two) http://i.imgur.com/AFGEbKQ.jpg . For organisms like this, I highly recommend double sponge filters like the one in the picture. It's the same as the one I am going to use, and the benefit of having two sponges is that you can clean one at a time to prevent the tank from cycling again, and they're fairly cheap.

My nieces setup sits at my brothers house empty. She gave up on it. I bet I could walk out with the entire setup for 50 bucks, lol. Maybe...we'll see.

So, that makes my personal total about $115 for the whole set up, but I am going above and beyond. Considering that heaters aren't inherently necessary for everyone to get the eggs to hatch, and considering that filters are never an absolute necessity, it could have been as low as $64. That, and plenty of people probably have some leftover tank stuff from pets they've had before.

Uh-oh her price just went down to 25 lol...

I have no idea why they don't want to vote for traits. Yes, 10 years is a long time, I doubt most of them will still be active by the time the experiment is completed, but based on some basic math, it's likely that the experimental population will be noticeably different from the control group in less than 2 years. That's a pretty short amount of time for an evolution experiment, honestly. Especially for a multicellular organism; most of those span multiple decades and are indefinitely ongoing.

That's not too bad really. Time flies. I just inherited a big house and it has a few empty rooms. This is starting to sound feasible. I doubt I'm going anywhere soon.
 
Upvote 0

PsychoSarah

Chaotic Neutral
Jan 13, 2014
20,521
2,609
✟95,463.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
What? You can fix them too? Intelligent and mechanically inclined? I'm impressed. How come the hubby wont fix them for you? Lol. J/K.
Ha. it's simple to fix leaks, you just have to take out the silicone lining the corners of the tank and reapply new silicone glue. Always test a tank before putting organisms in it.

Oh that's just a big fish tank. had envisioned some sort of specialized stainless steel tank for some reason.
XD I'm not even using big ones, 10 gallon tanks are modest sized fish tanks and probably the most common size seen in houses.

I've never had good luck with fish though, lol. My niece doesn't either. Man, her last tax check she wasted on 2500 bucks worth of nice tank and expensive fish...and 2 grand worth of fish died within a week or so! Whoa.
Sounds like she tried to do a saltwater tank without doing research first. Saltwater tanks, unlike the freshwater tanks I am setting up, are notoriously difficult to maintain. I'd also bet she didn't cycle the tank properly either; before dumping in a bunch of fish, you're supposed to actually have a couple "disposable ones" in the tank while the tank cycles. Tanks that have never been cycled before will go through phases in which bacteria that produce toxic chemicals appear, followed later by bacteria which actually help serve as natural filters. It takes usually 6-8 weeks to cycle a tank, and during this time frame, one must take special care to perform chemical tests on the water, do frequent water changes, and watch the behavior of the test fish to make sure the water never gets too toxic. Plus, even in a cycled tank, you can't just dump new fish in. If the mineral content of the water of the tank doesn't match what those fish were raised in, they can die from the difference in osmotic pressure. Thus, the bag they traveled in should be set in the water, and water from the tank gradually added into the bag over the course of a couple hours. That way, they don't die from the shock (this goes for the disposable test fish too, of course).




My nieces setup sits at my brothers house empty. She gave up on it. I bet I could walk out with the entire setup for 50 bucks, lol. Maybe...we'll see.
If it's at least 30 gallons, you could just use dividers to make that one tank contain the control, experimental, and overflow groups by itself.



That's not too bad really. Time flies. I just inherited a big house and it has a few empty rooms. This is starting to sound feasible. I doubt I'm going anywhere soon.
Like I said, I designed the experiment so that as many people as possible could do it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Divide

Well-Known Member
Apr 19, 2017
2,577
1,231
61
Columbus
✟81,201.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Sounds like she tried to do a saltwater tank without doing research first. Saltwater tanks, unlike the freshwater tanks I am setting up, are notoriously difficult to maintain. I'd also bet she didn't cycle the tank properly either; before dumping in a bunch of fish, you're supposed to actually have a couple "disposable ones" in the tank while the tank cycles. Tanks that have never been cycled before will go through phases in which bacteria that produce toxic chemicals appear, followed later by bacteria which actually help serve as natural filters. It takes usually 6-8 weeks to cycle a tank, and during this time frame, one must take special care to perform chemical tests on the water, do frequent water changes, and watch the behavior of the test fish to make sure the water never gets too toxic. Plus, even in a cycled tank, you can't just dump new fish in. If the mineral content of the water of the tank doesn't match what those fish were raised in, they can die from the difference in osmotic pressure. Thus, the bag they traveled in should be set in the water, and water from the tank gradually added into the bag over the course of a couple hours. That way, they don't die from the shock (this goes for the disposable test fish too, of course).

It wasn't saltwater, but the only thing she tersted was PH. (Oh I know what I'm doing...) she bought the whole schebang at once and come home with it and put the fish in it within a couple hours, lol. Just dumped 'em in...

If it's at least 30 gallons, you could just use dividers to make that one tank contain the control, experimental, and overflow groups by itself.

It's a 50 gal tank.

Like I said, I designed the experiment so that as many people as possible could do it.

I'm going down there soon to get the rest of my stuff. I'm going to ask about it.
 
Upvote 0