TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Why, or more importantly, how, did sexual reproduction of life forms evolve?

It seems that this reproductive mechanism would be rather cubersome: two essentially different organisms of the same species come together to exchange genetic material and hope to see offsring into the next generation... single cell organisms seem to be a whole lot more efficient at reproduction by just cloning ... so how and why did nature "decide" to also include sexual reproduction mechanisms in the "fight for survival?" Dawkins ascribes this whole reproductive thing as DNAs way of maikng more DNA. ... So to be ultra-reductionist we are mere DNA making machines??...

Share:

Closing Statement from Lincoln Solomon

Closed out. And no conclusion. Some evolutionists postulate random selection of mutant genes and transfer of such between single celled organisms as the architypes of sexual reproduction as we observe it today. Creationists / ID folks believe in the design of a Creator. I have not been convinced, from this conversation, about the evolutionary mechanisms which gave rise to sexes and sexual reproduction methods.
Thanks for the input every-one. I Think I'll ask Google ...

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Feb 14 2013: @ KP:

    So HOW did mutlicellular organisms "decide" on sexual reproduction. This means that some organs had to develop the ability to produce half the genome needed to match half the genome of the female of the species (where did she come from?) and to develop a transfer mechanism (sometimes even using third parties like bees and butterflies) so that the gene transfer and matching is just right to combine and form a new organism of the same species ...

    Unicellular organisms do transfer genes, but it seems that E.coli now is still E.coli from 50 yrs ago, despite having acquired many genes that code for antibiotic resistance ...
    • thumb
      Feb 14 2013: they did not. by the time multicell organisms came along, reproduction was already not as simple as you described. there never was a multicell organism that reproduced simply by cloning
      • Feb 15 2013: So if multicellular organisms did not decide on sexual reproduction, what did it for them? What laid down the rule that "if thou art an organism composed of two or more cells thou shalt not clone, but look for one such as yourself, but of opposite gender, and with him / her divide your genome in exactly half and combine it with his / her half and from that combination give rise to another like you ... "
        • thumb
          Feb 15 2013: i said: they did not have to decide, because when they arrived, it was already invented. the task multicellulars faced was not this. they had to figure out how to reproduce at all! they could not just divide. if you divide a cow, you get a half cow and not a small cow. they had to come up with a way to regrow the entire thing from a dedicated reproducer cell, while maintaining the gene transfer mechanism of single cell ancestors. maybe the first multicell organisms didn't have dedicated sexes. they just manufactured cells with the ability of growing another organism. and occasionally, upon meeting with another organism, they exchanged genes between their repro cells. even today, many species do not need another organism to reproduce, but they do use if they can. why sexes then? it is beneficial, because you have to carry one set of "hardware" only.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.