"Mario Petrinovich"  wrote in message
news:brq6ro$1eks$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
>         Hi folks
>
>         Firstly, I am a layman, don't know much about biology. But, I like
> to watch documentaries about life.
>         Well, yesterday I saw an article on the Internet. Here is the link
:
> www.nature.com/nsu/031215/031215-2.html

I tried to access this but could not, so my comments below can not take what
was discussed in the article into account - but I'll try again later.

>         In this article they are talking how vertebrates "share a
surprisingly
> large number of genes" with some coral. Well, this is completly in
> tune with what I saw in documentaries. What I saw in documentaries?
>         Firstly, I saw a sea plant (I forgot which one). A seed of that
> plant has a tiny brain, which it needs to find a good place to settle.
Whem
> it settles, it doesn't need that brain anymore, but instead it needs
energy
> to grow, so it eats its brain.

A brain is part of the vertebrate CNS, IIRC, and while invertebrates have
comparable function, plants do not (again, IIRC).  Is it possible that the
article used some sort of analogy that you took as verbatim?

>         Secondly, one documentary talked about origin of vertebral column.
> According to tha documentary, a vertebral column in the beginning were
> sand-sized magnets. If you take a few peaces of magnet, they would line
> themselves in line, pointing toward bottom (if you are in fluid). This way
> they could lead a tiny organism toward rich mud at the bottom.
>         If you put this two together, you are having a plant seed, which
is
> looking for a mud (which it knows how to exploit, and live of it). It
sounds
> logical that first it was plants, and from plants emerged animals. Plants
> are eating sunlight. Plants seeds need to move. Animals are moving.
> Animals are eating plants and other animals.

My feeling is that you're making some enormous jumps, here.  Your use of the
term "knows" is disturbing when you are trying to implant a
"brain" in
vegetation, as a plant "knows" nothing of exploitation, IMO.  Yes, it
exploits, but no, it does not "know how to exploit" (and sorry if I'm wrong
here, as I'm also a layman and won't being corrected.)

My understanding in that multi-cellular orgamism capable of photosynthesis
arose some 800 MYA to 1 BYA (presumabley these could be called plants) and
that "animals", such as these primitive and diverse ones were, arose 520 -
600 MYA (Cambrian explosion).  Chordates appeared within that period,
roughly in the 550 - 580 MYA and arose (more or less) simultaneously (i.e.
within a few tens of millions of years) with many other body plans (most
extinct), but presumably from these other "animals", rather than
plants.  My
$.02 (and not much more).  Regards, Brett.

>         I am puzzled how authors of that article didn't come to same
> conclusions. -- Mario
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 12/19/03 6:17:39 AM