Evolutionary Tree of Life | Episode 3 - Mammals (including Humans)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 12 жов 2024
- Buy the chart:
usefulcharts.c...
Episode 1:
• Evolutionary Tree of L...
Episode 2:
• Evolutionary Tree of L...
CREDITS:
Chart & Narration by Matt Baker
Hominid artwork by Ettore Mazza: / ettore.mazza
Animation by Syawish Rehman
Audio editing by Ali Shahwaiz
Theme music: "Lord of the Land" by Kevin MacLeod and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution license 4.0. Available from incompetech.com
Buy the chart:
usefulcharts.com/products/evolution-classification-of-life
Marsupials also live in the Americas, including the opossums, which you show on your chart. There used to be a lot more species in South America, where they were the dominant predators until the isthmus of Panama formed.
They also used to live in Antarctica, but they all died out when it froze over. Today the largest land animal that lives on Antarctica year round is a species of flightless midge.
marisupials originally evolved in south america!
You beat me to it.
and what about tapirs & peccaries??? Again, South America is denied its importance...
I live in South America and i have opossums living in a tree in my garden, they are native to this area (Didelphis albiventris), they are locally known as "comadreja overa"
This theology nerd is explaining evolution more comprehensively than most museums!
The way I was just talking about how I wanted the next episode of this last night!
The production quality of all of the videos this channel makes are unparalleled. The anatomical diagrams/ pictures on the side was a great idea!
Gondwana also included Antarctica. Nowadays, there's almost nothing there, and certain seals are the only mammals who go there other than us, but back when the Earth was much warmer, it was a very ecologically diverse place. The mammal fossils from Antarctica at that time are marsupials, just like the ones that currently live in Australia and used to live in South America before the Isthmus of Panama connected it to North America and they mostly got driven to extinction by the incoming placental mammals. I believe the current theory is that marsupials first evolved in the part of Gondwana that would become South America, then reached Australia by way of Antarctica.
Instead of sending robots and such to explore other planets, we should send them to find fossils in Antarctica.
It's not just marsupials that Australia, Antarctica and South America have in common. There are also southern beech trees, (Nothofagus) which are additionally in New Zealand and a few Pacific Islands.
R. I. P Milo! Gone but not forgotten.
Miss ya big man
Did something happen to Stefan Milo?
@@Scorpiove No. The cat used to illustrate domesticated cats was named Milo, and is sadly no longer with us.
Stefan, that chonky ape, is thankfully still around! Love ya Stefan. Stefan Milo fans reprazent!
@@GustavSvard Phew! Thanks for clarifying.
@@RealUlrichLeland He was indeed big. He was 1/4 Maine Coon and weighed about 23 pounds at his heaviest. He became fast friends with our *tiny* (six pounds) tuxedo cat, Chuti, whom you see cuddling with her brother in this video. Milo was by then a very old man, and Chuti was very young, so she'd slow motion chase him all over the house. It was adorable.
This chart is on my holiday wish list. I have purchased a few of Matt's charts as well as his book on the history of the Bible and the quality is superb. Given the exceptional craftsmanship they are quite reasonably priced as well.
I was going to point out that Possums are in the US, and not just Australia. I should know. They like digging through my trash and they like to block the road at 2AM
Lol 😆
Don’t bug him it’s Ozzy and his daughter from over of the hedge
are those not opossums? i thought they were a different species.
I was gonna be the guy who points out it's opossum. But I deleted it.
@@dflamm210 That is correct. Possums and Opossums are different animals. It's a little confusing because the 'o' at the beginning of opossum is silent.
I have been waiting for this for two weeks❤️
Thanks for the efforts.
Marsupials don't only live in Australia. They also are native to the Americas, mostly South America. One species, the Virginia Opossum, is native to the US.
yeah he makes some mistakes in his videos in what he says.
Like in this one he also can't pronounce Euarchonta lol.
But I think the information on his charts is pretty much correct
9:02 yep, seems a bit of a typo, seems like that comment should have been in reference to diprotodontia instead of marsupials in general
Monkeys/apes are not interchangeable, but also not mutually exclusive. Current understanding is that "Old World" monkeys and apes are a clade within a larger group of primates that includes "New World" monkeys. Can't make a clade of "monkeys" that excludes apes. Technically correct to call a chimp/gorilla/etc. a "monkey."
It just depends on what definition of "monkey" you want to use. I'm a big fan of clades, so I'd agree with you that defining "monkeys" as a clade (and thus including apes) is more useful. But by the exact same logic you can also call them "fish". Can't make a clade that includes all fish and excludes apes (or any land vertebrates, for that matter). It's technically correct, but at some point it's just not useful anymore. Just like it's also technically correct to say that all land plants are algae.
It... also depends on the language. In many languages in Europe there is no difference. In Dutch for example there is just "aap".
@@yarati4584 If this is a chart showing the Evolutionary Tree of Life then it should show accurate relations. The mistake with apes/monkeys is wrong to the point that it would give a person a very inaccurate understanding of these animals.
@@yarati4584Yes there's a useful human reason for excluding land animals from the term fish, but imo, there's no good useful reason for excluding apes from monkeys except that it makes some people uncomfortable. I think monkey should be a perfect synonym for simian.
Apes are a subset of monkey. All apes are monkeys, but not all monkeys are apes
Just shows you that you can learn new stuff at any age. I took evolutional biology in college many years ago, but they never separated the synapsids vs the sauropsids as you did here. I never new that the sauropsids had four cones for vision.
I think I never waited for youtube video so badly as for this one.
Requesting a deep dive on the ACTUAL most important species of all: doggos. Like which breeds were engineered/evolved from which and when?
Clint's Reptiles probably has a video on that.
@@EthanPineapplenot yet. He only recently got into the difference between Feliformia and Caniformia
Had to comment because two of my favorite mammal groups are missing!
Tapiridae (tapirs) under Perissodactyls is the often forgotten third family in the odd-toed ungulate family.
Ailuridae (red pandas) under Carnivora as the family all on their own.
@@CheeseGeck This is why he should have grouped the skunks and raccoons together with the mustelids in the superfamily "Musteloidea" as that's the sister taxon to the Pinnipeds anyway lol.
@CheeseGeck: He also forgot to include the Tragulidae which include the chevrotains and the Antilocapridae which has one member the American American pronghorn.
Technically all your other charts are included within this one, at least the ones about human family trees.
hey bonus revenu idea for the channel: when all the episodes for the chart is done combine them into one giant video and maybe make some slight script changes to clarify thr parts people seem to take issue with (like the minor omission of marsupials also being in other continents)
Yup. That's the plan 🙂
Wake up babe, new UsefulCharts evolution video just dropped
This is better than a normal biology class
"Even-Toed" is my favorite Pearl Jam song.
Something about butterflies?
About the monkey and ape comment, this chart doesn't show it well, but Hominoids (all apes) and Cercopithecids (old world monkey) share a Catarrhine (apes and old world monkeys) common ancestor AFTER the Platyrrhines (new world monkeys) split. So, following the rules of monophyly, all apes are specialized old world monkeys if new world monkeys are to be a type of monkey as well. This is the reason for the interchangeability which is _technically_ correct, albeit lacking detail should it be necessary. The same could be said for using the term "car" when "vehicle" technically works as well.
The tail isn't the defining feature here as the Barbary macaque (a baboon type of Cercopithecid) nearly lacks as much a tail as any Hominoid. If an individual's tail isn't absent altogether, then it measures in at a measly 4-22mm or something between not much thicker than your incisor teeth to your smallest pinkie knuckle.
This chart/video doesn't mention that apes and old world monkeys are more closely related to each older than old world monkeys and new world monkeys are related to each other
After seeing the internet being full of conversations about how apes and monkeys are different from each other, It's really strange to finally see a bunch of people in the comments pointing out how they're not different from each other.
I just found your channel and i absolutely love it. The Evolution of Life poster blew me away. Ill be listen to a ton of this in the coming weeks. Thanks for all your hard work creating this.
Liked and shared.
Godspeed
🧬
3:33 The only error i found was this, the eye should be one further back on the t rex skull, the two wholes are actually one at the back, and the other is on the top of the skull above that whole, I loved the video though
Interesting choice to have great apes, gibbons, old world monkeys, new world monkeys, lemurs and tarsiers all branching off the same node. This glosses over a lot of differences in relatedness.
Lots of things evolve from the same node on this chart for space. It's like this for simplicity's sake, saying "These all are closely related, and share common ancestry"
Awesome video! Bought the charts for my children to watch and learn:). Love from Sweden!
I'm very much enjoying this series Matt. Thank you!
I've always found it crazy that a deer is more closely related to a blue whale than a horse, I guess it's just one of the many surprising cases of convergent evolution.
Maybe we are wrong
Wow, this episode really dives deep into the story of mammals! What strikes me is how evolution isn't just a series of random changes, but a rich, adaptive process where creatures reshaped themselves over millions of years to survive and thrive. The part about synapsids developing better hearing and smell because they were nocturnal is fascinating-it shows how even seemingly small shifts in environment can push major physiological changes. It’s also humbling to realize that mammals, including us, only really flourished because of catastrophic events like asteroid impacts. Nature’s resilience is breathtakingly complex and a bit terrifying!
Finally peak is back i really missed this series.
Neanderthals still exist, I have a family of them 3 doors up the road, and the police cannot do anything to turn their music down at 2.40am in the morning.
Wonderful video! Two corrections: 1. As others have stated, there are marsupials in the Americas, and 2. Most black panthers are actually jaguars - it's dominant in jaguars and recessive in leopards - although technically any black member of the panthera genus could be a black panther 🐈⬛
Watching these videos makes me want to go back to school. Just learn and learn and learn....
I stopped after my Masters degree (though I then did teach college). But I hit the jackpot: I married Matt Baker. He talks to me about all his research for his posters and videos. Never a dull moment. Actually, today is our anniversary.
@@CharlotteIssyvoo Happy Anniversary and congratulations on your amazing catch! 😉
@@buildergradetocustommade 🤣He's a looker too! We met when I was 41 and he was 36. I hadn't thought I'd meet someone I wanted to spend my life with. That was fine. But then I met him.
I’ve been waiting so long for part 3
So fascinating. A great series as always.
Aw, thanks for putting Chuti and Ketsl in there. I wish they still cuddled as much as they used to. Maybe they'll cuddle more again when they're old.
Hi there, Matt and the whole UsefulCharts crew, can you please make a video on the Cambodian royal family tree. Thank you very much.
Great video as always! Looking forward for the next one
I didn’t expect you to be talking about camel toes today
I'm just here for the dumb creationist comment, just for that alone the series is worth it.
Limit all generations in the evolutionary frame to the structures of phenomenological experience and you’ll begin to understand the notions of heaven and earth.
If you believe that you can put all the parts to a computer on a table and expect it to make itself into a computer, I don’t care how long you give it, it will not happen. And we are waaaaaay more designed than a computer. Now who is the dummy for believing that? God is good, you should open your eyes to the creation that the Creator designed all around you and be grateful.
Worth it haha
@@Kadosh77 Thank you for making my wishes come true, I asked and you delivered.
@@jordanheath5258 Thank you for making my wishes come true, I asked and you delivered.
Very enjoyable. Best summary I have ever seen
Okay so the synapsid skull with the eye on it at 3:30 is freaking hilarious.
Nice video! But I think using K-Pg instead of K-T would be more accurate since the term Tertiary isn't used anymore
milo is such a beautiful and cute cat
I needed this for my zoology test yesterday 😭😭
There was a missed opportunity to include the mongooses, meerkats, and civets in the feliformia suborder. Great job tho -- looking forward to the next episode!
Constructive criticism that's not really a criticism: since you mentioned how the mammals of the mesozoic "sacrificed" their sight for better smelling and hearing, you could have mentioned that monkeys and apes partially reversed this. Now we have better vision than dogs for example, but our smell (and hearing) is pretty bad compared to them. Humans and apes in general have good vision compared to most mammals. Regarding both visual acuity, and color wise.
If you're ever in the vicinity, you can visit the neanderthal museum in the neander valley in Germany. You can also visit a reconstruction of the cave where they found the remains, although its on top of a 20 meter high tower because they mined the area.
what a huge tree, it's fascinating how big were scientific advances over the last 200 years.
I think your doing a amazing work (sadly this serie have far less views than most)🙃
After this chart, could you one on langages or/and writting systems, it will be very interesting
If we're being super pedantic, is saying dogs evolved from grey wolves wrong, because they were selectively bred and not naturally selected?
Only nitpicking because I love your videos.
I don't see why not since selective breeding and natural selection work in the exact same way.
The major transition from wolf to dog was probably natural evolution over many thousands of years. There is archaeological evidence that 'dogs' were first domesticated by humans more than 30,000 years ago. The intentional breeding did probably not begin in earnest until at least the introduction of agriculture, 9000 years ago.
Selective breeding is a mechanism for evolution. Evolution doesn't require natural unguided selection, any selection pressure will do. If that selection pressure comes from predators or the climate, you get evolution. If that selection pressure comes from humans deciding which animals survive, you get evolution. The only real difference is that selective breeding generally results in much more rapid and noticeable changes between generations.
Worth also mentioning that you can group raccoons and skunks with the other Mustelids as the superfamily "Musteloidea", sister taxon to the pinnipeds. I think this would be more accurate than listing the two separately.
This is the first time I have heard of the evolutionary process of breastfeeding.
I hope the high school science teacher community gets wind of this video series and starts using it in their classrooms!!
As a snow leopard I'm disappointed we aren't mentioned under Panthera ... no we're not just a type of leopards but something on our own.
This is your best video
Of course it is not until now that I realized that mongooses are missing. I think that mentioning "Hyaenidae" is a bit unfair to them, as both are part of the "Herpestoidea" branch. If you ever plan to make changes to this chart, please add this to your notes.
Excellent Matt👏👏👏
Thank you so much for creating this Resource
Yeah nah the common ancestor of Tarsiers and monkeys was far more recent than that of any of those other primates.
They don't even have reflective cat eye membranes. They go with the apes, not with the prosimians.
Wait did he ACTUALLY just say marsupials are only in Australia?? Hes generally a pretty smart man... I cant tell if he thought none of us knew about the rest of the world or if it was just incredibly lazy researching. Either way uh...not the level of work I've come to expect
This was an amazing video!!! Thank you for all the hard work you've done researching this subject; you help make a complicated subject easier to understand. The art for the early humans was also awesome! I did have a question, I could have sworn that modern dogs were recently decided to have descended from a shared ancestor with modern gray wolves (with many instances of interbreeding throughout the ages), and were no longer considered descended from gray wolves themselves; is that just misinformation being circulated, or is it just a super new theory? Thanks in advanced if you take the time to answer this.
(edited to get rid of a bad joke)
Great video and chart! If there is ever a revision, I would love to see the extinct mammal group Allotheria, which was very diverse and dominant among mammals during the Mesozoic and into the Cenozoic until placental mammals took over.
cant wait for the final episode
small correction about marsupials, they ORIGINATED from gondwana, and now mainly live on in australia, but some species still live in africa and the americas, theres also fossils found in antarctica
I would argue that humanity's two best friends are dogs and horses, not dogs and cats.
9:02 that is inaccurate, you have marsupials outside Australia such as the opossum/possum family that are common in the Americas.
Extra points, mammoths are much closer related to asian elephants then they are to African elephants.
And also all Ap3s are M0nkeys, they part of the old world m0nkeys, and the lack of tail isn't that unusual, it is a feature of many other mammals.
". . . marsupials, which again live only in australia."
opossums: am i a joke to you??
You will be revered for generations
11:20 Pretty sure Gondwana broke apart around 180 million years ago, whereas Afrotherians didnt start to appear until 20 million years ago - when africa was separated from both south america and eurasia (and thus that one particular group of mammals had to fill all the ecological niches), and then suddenly slammed northwards to form the mediterranean sea as well as the alps.
This series should be human world heritage.
You know you could've add Gorgonopsia for Therapsida, Tapirs for Perrisodactlya, Palaeoloxodon for Probscidea would be counts.
YAY ITS FINALLY HERE :D
THAT IS NOT WHERE THE EYE GOES ON TYRANNOSAURUS!!!
Loving this series, great that you're going to make a video for the evidence for evolution. Just a tip, evolution is reliant on heritability and variation, with this evolution is an unavoidable consequence, so that's already evolution proven, maybe a good way to start that video. If you mean you're going to prove the relatedness of all life you're better off using genetics, paleontology, comparative anatomy, embryology, and phylogeny.
The evolutionary tree in reverse will show various life forms who share a common attribute, merging into a species more appropriate for the existing geographical, climatic and environmental conditions
Regarding monkeys and apes, I have criticism with the chart and with the video. The commentary claims that monkeys and apes are two very different simians. I would argue that monkeys and apes are not very different simians at all and that the distinction between monkeys and apes is unimportant. The video is on the evolutionary tree of life, which implies, and demands, the primacy of cladistic relationships. "Monkeys" as used in the video and on the chart is a paraphyletic distinction. Old World monkeys and apes form a clade of which New World monkeys are outside. And as this is a chart/video about the evolutionary tree of life paraphyletic distinctions are unimportant and should be commented on as being paraphyletic - as well as what that means - when discussed. There is nothing particularly special about some animals in a clade losing certain features present in the basal member. In fact some monkeys have lost their thumbs and others, such as some macaques, which are not "apes" as the term seems to be used in the commentary and are part of what is labeled "Old World monkeys" on the chart, have even lost their tails (if instead "apes" is meant to include those macaques and one animal can be both a monkey and an ape then the two cannot be all that different after all).
In similar spirit, and especially in the context of the commentary, I find issue with the way primates are depicted in the chart. Coming out of the primate blob are various groups of animals that aren't ranked in any way, even though their relationships are well known. That's fine, as it's commonly done on the chart. The problem arises when the word "monkey" is thrown into the mix. In fact, as mentioned above, great apes, gibbons, and Old World monkeys form a clade, of which New World monkeys are outside. But although the chart doesn't explicitly imply anything wrong it does lead one to easily assume that New World monkeys and Old World monkeys are more closely related to each other than to anything else mentioned on the chart, especially with them being next to each other coming out of the blob, and especially with the commentary that claims that there is a big distinction between "monkeys" and "apes". And them being next to each other isn't even technically inaccurate. It's just that with the word "monkey" one is likely to place those two together and collectively separate them from, for example, the gibbons, which would be wrong. Even just swapping the positions of gibbons and Old World monkeys on the chart would help, IMO, although I think the issue would better be avoided in a more explicit way.
Thank you! This is thrilling to realize that you may be a descendant of Homo Neanderthalensis or Denisovans….
Some say we're closer to Bonobo than we are to Chimpanzee.
9:00 not true, there's a couple marsupials in South America and of course the North American Opossum
Opossums live in North America too.
I smell much better than most birds and reptiles do
ba dum tiss
I thought reptiles evolved from amphibians around 300 million years ago, about 80 million years after amphibians first appeared.
The first animals to lay waterproof eggs on land were amniotes, which included the ancestors of reptiles. Casineria is a good candidate for the first amniote, and it had a mix of reptile and amphibian characteristics.
@@Dr.Ian-PlectI’ll wait for him to address this and then buy the chart.
Hi Matt Baker
13:22- I'm not sure that's a leopard, it looks more like a Jaguar (P.onca). In the picture you have on the chart, the animal labeled P.pardus has fur with rosettes (dark hollow circles) with spots within the rosettes, which is characteristic of jaguars, but not leopards. There are other hallmarks of it being a jaguar, but the rosettes with spots in them is one of the most easily discernible.
I think you're right, looks like a Jaguar, or Onça Pintada as we say in Brazil.
Who will be the king of the kingdom animalia?
Sad that hyraxes couldn't make it onto the chart but some species do have to be cut
The opossum is the only marsupial that lives outside of Australia. The opossum lives in the Americas.
Besides the 93 species of opossums in the Americas, there are 7 species of shrew opossums and 1 south andean species called monitos del monte
21:25 I think it's more interesting to dispel common misconceptions and myths about evolution. I don't think the evidence helps as people often have a dunning-kruger level of knowledge of evolution.
Some particular elements would be: intelligent design (basically contradicted by vestigial organs), humans evolved from chimps or why didn't all apes evolve into humans (not understanding how evolution isn't a one size fits all but rather that multiple species have a shared ancestor). There are probably a ton more basic ones that denialists like to use, but these two I think are most common.
It is not about knowledge or understanding, they simply do not want to understand. That is why they use such stupid arguments.
@@Merecir it's half an half, I know as a kid I would ask similar questions. The questions are important, it's just the juvenile desire to also want yourself to be proven right that's the issue.
The fact that Homo sapiens and Neanderthals could interbread calls into question whether we are really different species, or if we were the same species with just a lot of variation.
They were different species
The thing is: the word "species" is notoriously difficult to define.
@@guilhermecastro9893 we usually define species among sexually reproducing animals as population groups unable to have viable offspring between themselves, so...
@@CarlosAdrianAguirre-hp9fv biologists use a henisian species conceot of genetic similarity
And that explains why so many rodents (such as my chinchilla) vaguely look like miniature monkeys.
It’s mammal time 🥳
Hi Matt, great video as usual. Maybe I missed it, but I can't see bats here. They're the second largest order of mammals, and one of only four times flight has evolved. Gimme some bats!
Brief mention of bats at 11:53 🦇
@@UsefulCharts I think I missed it because I thought they were much more closely related to rodents! I learn something new everyday.
I believe they've only recently settled on the position of bats. There's a lot of sources that still put them in completely different areas of the mammal tree. I think they were thought to be more closely related to the rodent rabbit primate group until recently.
9:00 Marsupials also live in South and North America...
You say that there was radiation during the K-T event; where did that come from? There were not literally a billion Hiroshima bombs detonating. The asteroid impact released a huge amount of energy, but it didn’t generate any radioactive material?
just pointing that out, amniotes evolved from amphibians while mammals evolved from reptiles
I don't quite understand speciation. I thought 2 species were officially distinct once they can no longer interbreed. But here, Mat says that Neanderthals and Denisovins are considered separate species, even though they interbred with us. Does that mean my earlier understanding was incorrect?
As far as I know there isn't one definition of species that is accurate 100% of the time.
@EthanPineapple evolution is an extremely gradual process with countless incremental changes gradually stacking up. It is not a phenomenon we can observe in a human lifespan, and we have a very limited understanding of it. Perhaps it's not weird that we are unable to properly define when 2 groups have deviated enough to be called a separate species.
Sorry for my English. I am dutch and not well educated in English .
How comes that capibara are listen in “ rodents order”( laurasia)? In the map they should be on the Gondwana part of the world ( Afrika a south Amerika).Now they are listed in laurasia. How come?
A second question is: is the map you made based totally on genetics?
Thanks for the clear information
You may want to double check that. At 14:07- they split at Boreoeuthera with Laurasiathera going to the left, while rodents continue up to branch off of Euarchontoglires.
The original "tree of life" was based off of physical characteristics before the discovery of the genetic code. This chart has been modified in consideration of genetics, but it still definitely is based off of the original pre genetic code tree of life.
@@theeutecticpoint I will look at it.
@@theeutecticpoint you are right. I made a mistake. Thanx!
At which point does an organism stop being a member of one species and become a member of another?
At no one point. It's kind of like seeing a color wheel and asking at exactly what point yellow ends and green begins. They're entirely arbitrary labels that we use to classify and better understand organisms, but nature often doesn't conform to our classification systems.
Why were the bones in the head so important that they were the reason for the 2 major groups of animals?
It's not the reason for the two different groups, it's just something most animals in those two groups have in common
Where does Gigantopithecus fit on the Hominid family tree?