NPR: Butterflies Show Evolution Can Happen in a Flash

Butterflies Show Evolution Can Happen in a Flash

Not too long ago, it looked pretty bleak for the males of the Blue Moon (or Great Eggfly) butterfly species. The butterflies, found on two islands in the South Pacific, seemed headed for extinction.

But the Blue Moon butterflies have made a dramatic recovery. Agence France-Presse reports that researchers believe it shows just how fast natural selection can work.

In 2001, a team of researchers surveyed the butterfly and found that males made up only 1 percent of the population, thanks to a parasite bacteria that was destroying them.

The researchers returned in 2006 for another survey when they heard that the male population had increased. When they first surveyed the butterflies on one of the islands, they found males were still vastly underrepresented. But by the end of the year, they found males and females were nearing parity. And the butterflies on the other island were at a 1:1 ratio.

"We usually think of natural selection as acting slowly, over hundreds of thousands of years," added Gregory Hurst, a senior author on the paper and a researcher in evolutionary genetics at University College London. "But the example in this study happened in the blink of the eye, in terms of evolutionary time, and is a remarkable thing to get to observe."

The Register reports that researchers believe the secret lies in a gene that holds the bacteria in check. It is so successful that "it spread throughout the entire population of butterflies within 10 generations -- over the course of a year."

Wicked cool, as we say in Boston.

So here's my question: Does this new discovery affect the whole evolution-intelligent design discussion?

3:22 PM ET | 07-17-2007 | permalink

Comments (Send a comment)

As with most episodes in the evolution vs. intelligent design debate, this situation illustrates the "But of course evolution has to work this way or it wouldn't work at all" argument.

Whatever freak males in the origninal butterfly populations were somehow immune or resistant to the parasitic bacteria would have been the ones to have passed their genes on to the next generation. If their immunity presented no other detriment to their survivability, it would dominate future generations.

It's nice to hope that, as a species, humanity could prove as resillient as the bacteria that easily evolve resistance to our attempts to eradicate them!

Sent by Organzola | 3:43 PM ET | 07-17-2007

This has no effect whatever on the evolution-intelligent design discussion. It is just another example of people who know better confusing adaptation with evolution. Adaptation can occour forever but until it produces a new species there is no evolution.

Sent by J. Kessler | 3:50 PM ET | 07-17-2007

Kessler. Adaptation is evolution. It is the subtle differences between parents and their children, spread over eons, that create new species.

Sent by Jody Sol | 4:06 PM ET | 07-17-2007

I agree with J. Kessler (though not his/her misunderstanding of the word "adaptation"): This has no effect whatsoever on the evolution-intelligent design discussion. Why? People who never believed in science in the first place aren't going to change their minds just because there is more and better scientific evidence.

Sent by Mark | 4:12 PM ET | 07-17-2007

I must agree with Mark and J. Kessler. ("This has no effect whatsoever on the evolution-intelligent design discussion.") That discussion never goes anywhere, as one side seeks truth in science, the other seeks comfort in faith.

Sent by John | 7:06 PM ET | 07-17-2007

this is no diff. than what batter gets the hits but the one with good eyes. Is that evolution? If evolution (spcl breeding) worked why aren't the foals of champions winning more horse races?

Sent by Carlos Vvaldez | 9:36 AM ET | 07-18-2007

For proof you'd need to see one kind of animal change to another, say a caterpillar into a butterfly or a tadpole into a frog. THEN you'd have proof.
But seriously, the discovery does have an effect on the argument. There are people in the middle who need a little more proof because they want to believe in the supernatural, even though they usually don't (which shows in their everyday actions).

Sent by Ralph | 9:38 AM ET | 07-18-2007

I find the whole evolution/intellegent design debate amusing. Why do people assume it has to be one way or the other. Why can't intellegent design manifest as evolution? I don't know if there is intellegent design, since there is no imperical way to prove it. But then one cannot prove intellegent design doesn't drive evolution either.

There are studies showing a higher incidence of favorable mutation in bacteria than chance would predict. So, take your pick on what you believe drives evolution, because in reality, both camps simply believe what they want to.

Sent by Brian Wilson | 9:39 AM ET | 07-18-2007

First of all, please allow me this opportunity educate every-one that "Intelligent Design" is simply a thinly veiled euphemism for G_D [out of respect for Judaism I did not spell the "O"].

Secondly, science is simply the study of the cosmos, as we can measure "it" [as our ability to measure improves, so does our understanding] and in some case predict about "it" from indirect means.

Science can not "create' something from nothing. G_D did and can.

Thirdly, evolution is not creation. It is survival.

I am both a scientist and a man of faith. My understanding of science and scientific laws does not conflict with my faith in a creator G_D.

Science is the study of G_D's creation. And thus the study of G_D.

DGP Jr. MS

Sent by Donald G. Purdy, jr. | 10:14 AM ET | 07-18-2007

O.K. I'll weigh back in. Jody Sol tells me that adaptation is evolution. I find this confusion in dictionaries and texts. If this is so, the adaptations created by breeders by "unnatural selection" of plants and animals is evolution and, since this is done on purpose, must count as "Intelligent Design."
DGP Jr. MS tells us "Intelligent Design" is a euphemism for G-d. This is what the critics of "ID" tell us but not what its proponents say. Why does the designer have to be a "Supreme Being"? Humans have been tinkering with life design since the beginnings of husbandry and agriculture and with considerable success. It revolutionized our grains and meats in prehistoric times. It is revolutionizing our supermarket foods today. Isn't this "Intelligent Design"?
Personally, I am not a proponent of any evolutionary or creationist scheme. I just think the hullabaloo is fun. I haven't a clue how the universe began or how we got here and I don't think any religion or scientist does either.

Sent by j. Kessler | 5:10 PM ET | 07-18-2007

Send a Comment

Comments are reviewed and edited by NPR prior to display. All comments will be read, but not all will be posted.

NPR reserves the right to read on the air and/or publish on its Web site or in any medium now known or unknown the e-mails and letters that we receive. We may edit them for clarity or brevity and identify authors by name and location. For additional information, please consult our Terms of Use.

E-mail this Page

Recipient's e-mail address:	» Up to twelve addresses, separated by commas.
Your e-mail address:
Your name:
Personal message (optional, 600 characters max):
Your NPR member station:
Are you a member of your local NPR station?	Yes No
Would you like to receive information from your local NPR member station? (see NPR's privacy policy)	Yes No
Please send me updates from NPR.	Yes No

(Information collected by NPR will be used solely for internal NPR or NPR member station purposes and only if you selected 'yes' above. See NPR's privacy policy for more information.)

Tom Regan

Blogger

About Us

This year's election cycle has been one of the most exciting in memory. At the NPR News Blog we'll do our best to bring you interesting, informative -- and controversial -- stories from our own reporters and bloggers, as well as the rest of the best of the Internet and blogosphere. And we hope you'll let us know what you think as well.

Want to learn more? Be sure to read our Frequently Asked Questions and our discussion guidelines.