« HYBRIDS | Main | Sustaining Practice »

March 20, 2004

Hybrids in Biology and Physics

"Hybrid Vigour"

. . . 2 species [or more commonly sub-species] combine
- result will be always be "tougher" . . . due to new genetic characteristics.

The Hybrid will still have the same genes, but the genes have been affected by the new 'company' . . . the genes will 'know' new things and therefore behave slightly differently, creating a new, and better, animal/plant etc.

Eg. Mongrel dogs. Purebreed dogs are more susceptable to infection and disease, and are often considerably less intelligent [based on logic] than mongrels [hybrids].

1. Damien Hirst work:
a white sheep in a tank of formaldahyde installed in a gallery by Hirst. Someone comes along [another artist it turns out] and tips black ink into the tank . . . thereby creating a new work [a hybrid] . . . a black sheep.

2. Plants and food: the GE debate.
Apparently wheat has actually been 'modified' for a while now, only it hasn't been by putting in other genes, it's been doubling the chromosomes [not sure if that's GE or not?]. The result of course being bigger, 'better' wheat harvests ñ literally bigger grains of wheat.

3. NZ ducks:
are predominantly hybrids of the native Grey Duck and the introduced Mallard [UK]. The driving factor behind this is interesting in relation to design in that it is essentially one of form. The Mallard drake is irresistable to both breeds ñ by design. The male Mallard has brilliant colouring on it's head, whereas the Grey duck is, well, grey! This colouring has a downside too however, as it makes the male Malard more vulnerable to predators [this is common of males in many species especially birds].

4. Deer in NZ.
We have 2 kinds of introduced Deer, one from Europe and one from Canada. They look very different as they have evolved seperately [diff continents] over thousands of years, and people never expected them to cross-breed. Of course they have, and for a similar reason to the ducks ñ the male of one species [Red Deer] is more 'attractive'. Although this time because of it's 'call'. Again I think youu could say, by design. As a result almost all deer in NZ are now Red Deer . . . it is the most successful species.

5. Purity is a myth.
Even though we have what we call purebreeds, they have been hybrids of something at various point along their evolution.

6. Evolution.
Evolution is 'divergent' first and then 'convergent' later. Theory is that there are a number of niches to be filled in the broader system [ecosystem], and things will be devolped until the niches are filled. Once filled, those forms filling them will then become convergent . . . [an assumption here ñ to the point that only one form will fill each niche?] . . . [but I guess the lesson here is that those niches [the system] keep changing so this won't ever happen?].

7. Definitions:
It is therefore difficult within Biology to actually define species. The definitions must remain in flux . . . hmmm very post-modern idea.

8. Mules.
A mule is a hybrid of a horse and a donkey, but it cannot produce offspring. A mule is always infertile [not sure why at this stage?]. The mule came up because it can't be defined as a species, as within the biology this relies on the ability to breed, and create more [mules or whatever] . . . So the mule is a very interesting hybrid in that it's not self perpetuating like most others.

9. Physics.
The 3rd law of classical thermodynamics is: all systems tend toward a state of entropy [chaos, randomness, dis-order].
. . . in the absence of a controlling source a system will always break down. Eg. If roads weren't maintained regularly they'd become unusable to most cars.

10. Energy:
Biology disagrees with Physics. Actually evolution [an idea fundamental to current biology] refutes/negates the Physical law stated above ñ as evolution implies a system that gets continually better. Biologists consider that there is a controlling source [of life?] and that this is Energy.

11. Sharks:
Any life-form that resists change will face extinction. Sharks have been around for 250 million years, and are considered by biologists to be the most successful life-form on earth. [Dad suggests this is perhaps why we are really so frightened of them . . . but then he's a biologist!].

Posted by Luke Wood at March 20, 2004 10:49 AM

Comments

The point in regards to the Biology refuting the 3rd law of classical thermodynamics is quite interesting. If my basic graft of Evolution is correct it is often change created by environmental effect, the reason why the Galapagos Islands where so important to Darwinís theory. Now, if in the case of the 3rd law of classical thermodynamics that if a source is not maintained a system will break down, what will be the effect of the environmental damage that humans are creating - the breaking of the eco system, or will we see an eco system evolve to combat our pollution.

Posted by: Keith at March 22, 2004 11:21 AM

Yeah that's THE big question I guess regarding our continuing existence . . . What's with the Galapagos Islands and Darwin? Excuse my ignorance, but all this science stuff's comin from my dad . . . I never did any sciences . . . but now thinking maybe I should have!

Posted by: Luke Wood at March 22, 2004 05:22 PM