C. Evolution · EvolutionBefore Darwin: Deep Time, Extinction, Lamarck and Malthus
C2.3 C2.1 A2.2 A1.10About 70 minutes
Learning goals- I can describe the ideas of Linnaeus, Cuvier, Hutton, Lyell, Lamarck and Malthus.
- I can explain how ideas about deep time, extinction and population growth prepared the way for Darwin.
- I can explain Lamarck's theory and why the evidence does not support inheritance of acquired characteristics.
- I can compare geometric and arithmetic growth, as Malthus did.
Words to know
fixity of species
The older idea that species never change and were the same from the beginning.
extinction
The permanent disappearance of a species.
catastrophism
Cuvier's idea that Earth's history included sudden disasters that wiped out many species.
uniformitarianism
Lyell's idea that the slow processes we see today (erosion, deposition, volcanoes) also shaped Earth in the past, over very long times.
deep time
The idea that Earth is extremely old: billions of years, not thousands.
inheritance of acquired characteristics
Lamarck's idea that traits gained during a lifetime are passed on. Not supported by evidence.
use and disuse
Lamarck's idea that body parts used a lot grow stronger and parts not used shrink, and that these changes are inherited.
geometric growth
Growth by multiplying (1, 2, 4, 8, ...).
arithmetic growth
Growth by adding the same amount (1, 2, 3, 4, ...).
Standing on the shoulders of giants
Charles Darwin did not come up with evolution out of nowhere. When he set out on his famous voyage in 1831, he carried a new geology book. He later read an essay on human population that changed his thinking. Scientists before him had already argued that Earth was very old, that species could go extinct, and even that species could change.
In this lesson you will meet the thinkers whose ideas Darwin built on, and see how science progresses: each idea is tested against evidence, kept, changed or thrown out.
A timeline of ideas leading to Darwin's On the Origin of Species (1859). Dates are publication dates of key works, except Darwin's voyage on HMS Beagle (1831 to 1836).Linnaeus: naming life (1735)
You met Carl Linnaeus in the Diversity of Living Things unit: the Swedish naturalist who gave us binomial nomenclature and the ranks of classification. Linnaeus first published his system in 1735. Like most scientists of his time, he started out believing in the fixity of species: species were created as they are and do not change. His careful grouping of similar organisms, however, made it easier for later scientists to ask why some species are so alike.
Cuvier: extinction is real (1796)
The French anatomist Georges Cuvier compared the bones of mammoths with those of living elephants. He showed they were different species and that mammoths no longer existed anywhere. He proved that extinction really happens, which many people had doubted.
Cuvier also noticed that different rock layers contain different fossils, with deeper (older) layers holding organisms less like today's. He explained this with catastrophism: sudden disasters, such as floods, wiped out the species of one period, and other species then filled the land. Cuvier did not accept that species change into new species. Still, his evidence for extinction and for a changing fossil record was essential to evolution.
Hutton and Lyell: deep time (1788 and 1830)
The Scottish geologist James Hutton studied rock layers and erosion. He realized that slow processes, such as rivers wearing down mountains and sediment piling up, would need enormous amounts of time to build the rocks we see. Earth must be far older than people had thought.
Charles Lyell expanded this idea in his book Principles of Geology (1830 to 1833). His principle of uniformitarianism says that the same natural processes we can watch today worked in the past at similar rates. Small changes, added up over vast time, produce huge results.
Darwin read Lyell's book on the Beagle. He applied the same thinking to living things: if small geological changes can build mountains, perhaps small biological changes, added up over a very long time, can build new species.
Lamarck: the first full theory of evolution (1809)
The French naturalist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck published the first detailed theory that species change over time, in Philosophie zoologique (1809). He deserves credit for saying clearly that species are not fixed and that they change in response to their environment. His proposed mechanism, however, was wrong. He suggested:
- Use and disuse: body parts that are used a lot become larger and stronger; parts that are not used shrink.
- Inheritance of acquired characteristics: changes gained during a lifetime are passed on to offspring.
In his most famous example, giraffes stretched their necks to reach higher leaves, their necks got slightly longer, and their offspring were born with longer necks.
Lamarck's (incorrect) explanation of the giraffe's long neck. Step 2 is an acquired change; step 3 assumes it is inherited. Evidence shows that changes to body cells are not passed on through eggs and sperm.Why Lamarck's mechanism fails
- Acquired changes do not change the DNA in eggs or sperm. A weightlifter's muscles grow, but the DNA in their reproductive cells does not change, so their children are not born muscular.
- Experiments. In the 1880s the German biologist August Weismann cut the tails off mice for five generations in a row. Every new generation was still born with normal tails.
- Many traits cannot be "used" into existence. The colour of a moth's wings or the shape of a seed cannot be changed by effort.
Biologists today do study epigenetics, chemical tags that change how genes are switched on, and some of these effects can last into the next generation. This is an active research area, but it does not support Lamarck's idea that using a body part makes it grow in the next generation.
Worked exampleExample 1: Let's compare explanations
Cave fish in some dark caves have no working eyes, while their relatives in rivers have eyes. Write a Lamarckian explanation and then say what is wrong with it.
- Lamarckian explanation: the fish did not use their eyes in the dark, so the eyes shrank in each fish's lifetime (disuse), and the offspring inherited smaller eyes. Over many generations the eyes disappeared.
- What is wrong: shrinking from disuse would happen in body cells. It would not change the DNA in eggs and sperm, so it could not be inherited.
- A better explanation needs inherited variation: some fish were born with genes for smaller eyes. In complete darkness, eyes give no advantage and cost energy to build. Fish that did not spend energy on eyes may have had more energy for survival and reproduction, so those alleles became more common. (You will build this kind of explanation in the next lesson.)
Lamarck: disuse shrinks the eyes, and the change is inherited. Problem: acquired changes are not passed through DNA. Evolution needs inherited variation plus selection.
Malthus: more mouths than food (1798)
In An Essay on the Principle of Population (1798), the English economist Thomas Malthus argued that human populations tend to grow geometrically (1, 2, 4, 8, 16, ...: they multiply), while food supplies can only grow arithmetically (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, ...: they add). He suggested a population could double about every 25 years if nothing held it back. Sooner or later, a population outgrows its food, and famine, disease and competition hold numbers down.
Darwin read Malthus in 1838, and so did Alfred Russel Wallace some years later. Both realized the same thing applies to every species: far more offspring are born than can survive. There must be a struggle for existence, and the individuals best suited to their environment are most likely to win it.
Malthus's idea in numbers. A population that doubles each generation quickly outruns a food supply that only adds one unit each generation. By generation 5 there are 32 units of population for 6 units of food.Worked exampleExample 2: Let's apply Malthus to a real species
A pair of house mice can have about 5 to 10 litters per year in good conditions. Suppose a population of 20 mice in a barn doubles every 2 months with no limits. How many mice would there be after 1 year? What actually stops this from happening?
- 1 year = 12 months = 6 doubling periods.
- Population = 20 × 2⁶ = 20 × 64 = 1280 mice.
- Food in the barn does not multiply 64 times, so most mice cannot get enough to eat. Owls, cats and foxes catch some, disease spreads in crowded conditions, and many young die.
- This is Malthus's point, applied to all species: far more offspring are produced than can survive.
1280 mice in theory. In reality limited food, predators and disease keep the population much smaller, so only some offspring survive.
Just for funLamarck's theory in action: if using a body part made it bigger for the next generation, the children of video gamers would be born with giant thumbs. Biologists have checked. They aren't.
Hands-on activityDeep time on a string
You need: a 4.6 m piece of string or adding-machine tape (or tape several sheets of paper together), a metre stick or measuring tape, sticky notes and a pen.
Scale: 1 m = 1 billion years, so 1 mm = 1 million years.
- Mark one end "Earth forms, about 4.6 billion years ago" and the other end "Today".
- Measure from the Today end and mark:
- first evidence of life, at least 3.5 billion years ago: 3.5 m
- first abundant animal fossils (Cambrian), about 540 million years ago: 54 cm
- non-avian dinosaurs go extinct, 66 million years ago: 6.6 cm
- Homo sapiens appears, about 300 000 years ago: 0.3 mm (a pencil dot is wider than this!)
- Stand at the Earth forms end and walk to Today. Notice how much of the string has no animals at all.
- Write two sentences: why did Hutton and Lyell's idea of deep time matter to Darwin?
What to look for: correct measurements from the Today end; the insight that evolution of complex life used only the last part of Earth's history, but even that is hundreds of millions of years, which is plenty of time for small changes to add up.
Your turn
1What did Cuvier prove by comparing mammoth bones with elephant bones?
That mammoths were a different species that no longer existed: extinction is real.
2Explain uniformitarianism in your own words.
The slow processes that shape Earth today (erosion, deposition, volcanoes) also acted in the past, at similar rates, so given huge amounts of time they could produce mountains, canyons and thick layers of rock.
3What two ideas make up Lamarck's mechanism of evolution?
Use and disuse, and inheritance of acquired characteristics.
4What did Lamarck get right?
That species change over time and that change is connected to the environment.
5Describe Weismann's experiment and what it showed.
He cut off the tails of mice for five generations in a row. The offspring were always born with normal tails, showing that changes to the body during life are not inherited.
6State Malthus's main idea about populations.
Populations tend to grow geometrically while food grows only arithmetically, so populations outgrow their resources and are held back by famine, disease and competition.
7Which two scientists were both inspired by Malthus to think about natural selection?
Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace.
More practice: warm-up
1Who wrote Principles of Geology?
2What is fixity of species?
The older idea that species never change.
3Continue the geometric pattern: 3, 6, 12, 24, ...
48, 96 (each term doubles).
4Continue the arithmetic pattern: 3, 6, 9, 12, ...
15, 18 (add 3 each time).
5Which scientist explained the fossil record with catastrophism?
More practice: on your own
1Explain how Lyell's ideas helped Darwin think about evolution.
Lyell showed that small, slow changes over very long times can produce huge results in geology, and that Earth is very old. Darwin applied this to life: small inherited changes, adding up over many generations, could produce new species, and deep time gave enough time for this.
2A Lamarckian says, "Ducks have webbed feet because their ancestors stretched their toes while swimming." Rewrite this as a scientifically accepted explanation.
Ancestral birds varied in how much skin they had between their toes, because of inherited genes. Those with more webbing swam better, found more food and escaped predators, so they survived and reproduced more. Over many generations, alleles for webbed feet became more common.
3A population of 50 rabbits doubles every year. How many would there be after 5 years with no limits? Why doesn't this happen in nature?
50 × 2⁵ = 50 × 32 = 1600 rabbits. Limited food and space, predators (such as foxes and hawks) and disease kill many, so only some offspring survive.
4Cuvier believed in extinction but not in evolution. Explain how his evidence still helped the theory of evolution.
He showed that species can disappear and that different rock layers hold different fossils, with older layers less like living species. These patterns are what evolution predicts, so his evidence later supported a theory he himself rejected.
5Why is Lamarck still important in the history of biology even though his mechanism was wrong?
He proposed the first detailed theory that species change over time in response to the environment, which challenged the fixity of species and made scientists look for the true mechanism.
Challenge
1Scientists sometimes say that "a wrong idea that can be tested is more useful than a vague idea that cannot." Use Lamarck to explain this statement.
Lamarck made a clear, testable prediction: acquired changes are inherited. Scientists like Weismann could test it (cutting mouse tails) and show it was false. This narrowed the search for the real mechanism (inherited variation and selection). A vague idea could never be tested, so it would not move science forward.
2A population of 2 bacteria doubles every 20 minutes. Using Malthus's reasoning, how many bacteria would there be after 4 hours with no limits? Explain why real cultures stop growing long before this.
4 hours = 240 min = 12 doublings. 2 × 2¹² = 2 × 4096 = 8192 bacteria. (In 24 hours it would be 2 × 2⁷², a number far too large to be real.) Real cultures run out of nutrients and space, and waste builds up, so growth slows and stops: the struggle for existence.
3Explain how the ideas of Hutton/Lyell, Cuvier and Malthus each supply one ingredient of Darwin's theory.
Hutton and Lyell: Earth is very old and small changes add up (deep time for gradual change). Cuvier: species can go extinct, and the fossil record shows life has changed over time. Malthus: more offspring are produced than can survive, so there is a struggle for existence in which only some survive to reproduce. Darwin combined these with inherited variation to propose natural selection.
Check your understandingQuiz
1. Which scientist showed, using mammoth and elephant bones, that extinction is real?
2. Uniformitarianism is the idea that:
4. Why is the inheritance of acquired characteristics rejected?
5. Malthus said food supplies grow:
6. Which book did Darwin read on the Beagle?
For parents and teachersBig idea (C2.3, A2.2): students analyse the contributions of several scientists (Lyell, Malthus, Lamarck and others) to modern evolutionary theory. Gould and Eldredge appear in the lesson on patterns and pace of evolution, and Darwin and Wallace in the next lesson.
How to help: Ask your teen to tell the story as a relay: "What did each scientist hand on to the next?" The deep-time string activity is memorable when done together in a hallway.
Common difficulties:
- Thinking Lamarck was foolish. Stress that he made a testable proposal; testing it is how science advanced.
- Mixing up geometric and arithmetic growth. Geometric multiplies, arithmetic adds.
- Confusing Cuvier's catastrophism with Lyell's uniformitarianism. Sudden disasters vs. slow steady change.
Sources: dates are publication dates of the named works (Linnaeus Systema Naturae 1735; Hutton's Theory of the Earth 1788; Cuvier's paper on elephants 1796; Malthus 1798; Lamarck 1809; Lyell 1830 to 1833; Darwin 1859). Deep-time dates in the activity are rounded scientific estimates.