Jump to content
The World News Media

Misterio resuelto: así era la primera flor que apareció en la Tierra


Raquel Segovia

Recommended Posts

  • Member

Un equipo de investigadores franceses desarrolló un modelo robótico con la apariencia y características que tendría el antepasado de todas las plantas con flor, a través del análisis de fósiles florales de hace millones de años. Los detalles

image.png

Hace 470 millones de años -aproximadamente 30 o 40 millones antes de que los animales evolucionen con extremidades y pulmones, por ejemplo- las plantas ya existían en la superficie terrestre. Fuera del agua, sin embargo, las plantas se encontraron con condiciones muy distintas a las del océano: ambiente seco, sin flotabilidad para contrarrestar la gravedad y condiciones distintas a las hídricas para reproducirse. Por eso, todas las especies vegetales se fueron complejizando poco a poco con tallos más duros y reproducción por semillas o polen, entre otras adaptaciones.

Gracias a este proceso de evolución, hace por lo menos 140 millones de años, aparecieron las plantas con flores (o angiospermas) y con el tiempo se convirtió en el tipo dominante de plantas, con mayor número de especies (actualmente casi 400 mil)

En mayo de 2016, los expertos del Real Jardín Botánico de Kew, en Londres, publicaron un detallado informe sobre el estado de las plantas en el mundo. En él indicaban que de las 391 mil especies de plantas vasculares conocidas –de las cuales el 21% se encuentran en peligro de extinción aunque cada año se describan 2 mil más– unas 369 mil lucen flores: esta característica fundamentalmente reproductiva con formas y tonalidades, que, a pesar de que data de tiempos inmemoriales, es una innovación evolutiva relativamente reciente a escala geológica.

El modelo robótico que muestra como sería la primera flor de la tierra (Nature Communications –Hervé Sauquet & Jürg Schönenberger)

 

hora, un equipo de investigadores científicos francés publicó un estudio en la revista Nature Communications, donde señalan que su ancestro más reciente debió existir hace aproximadamente 250 o 140 millones de años.

La reconstrucción robótica que crearon del aspecto de la primera flor y el descubrimiento de nuevos aspectos de la evolución de estas plantas son dos de los aspectos más interesantes del trabajo coordinado por Hervé Sauquet, un botánico y biólogo evolutivo que trabaja en el Laboratorio de Ecología, Sistemática y Evolución de la Universidad de París-Sur, en Francia.

En el estudio se muestran por primera vez las posibles características de la que sería "la madre de todas las flores", el antepasado de todas las plantas con flor. Se trata de un espécimen que según sus conclusiones era hermafrodita porque ya presentaba órganos masculinos y femeninos.

image.png

El modelo muestra una flor -similar a una magnolia o un jazmín- con muchos tépalos (estructuras que funcionan como pétalos y sépalos) formando dos espirales, con cinco estambres (órganos reproductivos masculinos) y cinco carpelos (órganos femeninos). Para determinarlo, examinaron 21 rasgos florales distintivos en 792 especies de angiospermas desde la posición de los ovarios hasta la relación que existe entre las diferentes familias a las que pertenecen a través de un minucioso estudio del registro fósil. No obstante, los fósiles florales más antiguos que existen no tienen más de 130 millones de años.

Este novedoso resultado arroja luz sobre un conocimiento sobre el origen de las flores que todavía es escaso. Aún falta descubrir cómo se originaron los mecanismo que impulsaron su gran diversificación, o por qué algunas especies perdieron sus estambres, por ejemplo.

image.png

De hecho, los datos disponibles no permiten conocer el color, el tamaño o la forma exacta del antepasado floral que ahora han descrito. Ni siquiera en qué zona del mundo pudo crecer. Incluso los investigadores sostienen que no hay una especie que comparta estas características en la actualidad.Aun así, su investigación constituye una de las aproximaciones más precisas a la evolución de las plantas angiospermas y servirá en un futuro para impulsar nuevos estudios sobre estos organismos.

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 337
  • Replies 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.  
    • Hey Self! 🤣I came across this interesting conspiracy theory. There are scholars who firmly believe in the authenticity of those artifacts. I value having conversations with myself. The suggestion of a mentally ill person has led to the most obscure manifestation of a group of sorrowful individuals. 😁
    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
    • I'm not bothered by being singled out, as you seem to be accustomed to defending and protecting yourselves, but it's a good idea to keep your dog on a leash. Speaking of which, in a different thread, TTH mentioned that it would be great if everyone here shared their life stories. As both of you are the librarians here, I kindly ask you to minimize any signs of intimidation or insincerity. It is you people who need to be "banned" here. However, it is quite evident that you hold a negative influence, which God recognizes, therefore you are banned from your own conscience in His eyes.
  • Members

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,410

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Anna

      Anna 5,083

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,679
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.