Because giraffes are heartless creatures, and other musings

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Those of you who read the recent Tet Zoo article on The Second International Workshop on Sauropod Biology and Gigantism may have been wondering about the odd picture I showed in one of the slides of my talk. It was some sort of ‘survival of the fittest’ cartoon posed as a multi-choice exam question: it shows long-necked giraffes surviving in times of hardship while their short-necked brethren starve to death and decompose. Standard high-school textbook stuff. What makes the diagram funny - the reason it was included in my talk - is that some student genius sought to modify it. And hence we have...

This has become one of those internet meme things (among science nerds, at least) and is easy to find online. If you’re already familiar with it, pat yourself on the back for being wickedly trendy and down with the kids. And while we’re here, here’s another, err, interesting illustration I used in my talk...

What the hell kind of point was I trying to make here? It’s a response to Senter’s proposal that the sauropod neck might have evolved primarily for use in sexual selection (Senter 2007). There are lots of reasons for disputing this proposal - as you’ll know if you've read the Tet Zoo article on the subject, or the response I and colleagues published (Taylor et al. 2011) - but it’s a specific reference to our argument that suggesting that sexual selection operated on the same part of the body across the entirety of Sauropoda throughout its long history looks extraordinarily unlikely in view of what we know about other tetrapods. It would be similar to seeing, for example, Megaloceros-like antlers distributed across the whole of Artiodactyla. And there we have it.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Refs - -

Senter, P. 2007. Necks for sex: sexual selection as an explanation for sauropod dinosaur neck elongation. Journal of Zoology 271, 45-53.

Taylor, M., Hone, D., Wedel, M. & Naish, D. 2011. The long necks of sauropods did not evolve primarily through sexual selection. Journal of Zoology 285, 150-161 [free pdf]

Darren Naish is a science writer, technical editor and palaeozoologist (affiliated with the University of Southampton, UK). He mostly works on Cretaceous dinosaurs and pterosaurs but has an avid interest in all things tetrapod. His publications can be downloaded at darrennaish.wordpress.com. He has been blogging at Tetrapod Zoology since 2006. Check out the Tet Zoo podcast at tetzoo.com!

More by Darren Naish

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe