Nikola Chavkosk
Well-Known Member
Or even go-away birds would have more similar color with curassows, and similar shape of beak, crest and tail and body. (?)
Animals that look related but aren't.
- Thread starter FelipeDBKO
- Start date
Or even go-away birds would have more similar color with curassows, and similar shape of beak, crest and tail and body. (?)
Mongooses and Weasels? Hyenas and Dogs? Brown Bears and Sea Lions (males)? Pigs and Peccaries? Deer and Gazelles?
Bear and sea lion???
))
It's superficial....but Steller Sea Lion bulls and Brown Bear boars. They kind of remind me of one another.
Yeah, members of Herpestidae and Mustelidae families are quite similar.
Hyenas and canids too.
Bears and sea lions are very different! I don't know why do you think that.
Suidae and peccaries are the only members of the suborder Suina.
Deers and gazelles are artiodactyls, and there are several animals in this order that look alike... But these two animals are less close than they look... For example: gazelles are closer to cattles than deers.
I reckon Pleistohorse would have seen loads of both bears and Steller's sealion bulls, and although they don't actually look alike in reality there is still a basic superficial resemblance in the size, colour and general hulking shape. Sealers used to call sealions and fur seals "sea bears" because of the way the males look.
The fossa resembles a jaguarondi.
Long-snouted ground squirrels resemble tree shrews.
Bushbabies resemble dwarf lemurs.
Long-snouted ground squirrels resemble tree shrews.
Bushbabies resemble dwarf lemurs.
The fossa resembles a jaguarondi.
Long-snouted ground squirrels resemble tree shrews.
Bushbabies resemble dwarf lemurs.
Long-snouted ground squirrels resemble tree shrews.
Bushbabies resemble dwarf lemurs.
The tarsiers are closer to monkeys than lemurs, lorises, galagos, etc.
And cuscus looks like some primates, such as pottos.
And cuscus looks like some primates, such as pottos.
Specialist Elbr
Member
To sum degree the question is not that well defined. As long as you agree with the science that all Metazoas (members of the animal kingdom) are all related. I more pedantic way of labeling this post would be .. "What too creatures look surprisingly similar, while being more closely related to creatures that look quite different"
To really answer this question a good reference to the tree of life such as OneZoom Tree of Life Explorer can go a long way. This is not the %100 final answer, but it is still quite good.
I know the bird watching community underwent a big shakeup starting in the 1990s when genetic studies were done to classify birds. The picture did not form a coherent image until some time in the 20-zeros.
The biggest surprise if just how isolated falcons were from the other raptors. The falcons and the eagles are separated by vast genetic differences. To give an example peregrine falcons and bald eagles share only the basic bird heritage. To example this, a red-headed woodpecker and a bald eagle share more genetic information than either one has to a peregrine falcon. The falcons have only a single family of birds near to them and those are the caracas witch have a quite falcon like appearance. Professional biologist always had a hard placing the falcons with the "other hawks",
To really answer this question a good reference to the tree of life such as OneZoom Tree of Life Explorer can go a long way. This is not the %100 final answer, but it is still quite good.
I know the bird watching community underwent a big shakeup starting in the 1990s when genetic studies were done to classify birds. The picture did not form a coherent image until some time in the 20-zeros.
The biggest surprise if just how isolated falcons were from the other raptors. The falcons and the eagles are separated by vast genetic differences. To give an example peregrine falcons and bald eagles share only the basic bird heritage. To example this, a red-headed woodpecker and a bald eagle share more genetic information than either one has to a peregrine falcon. The falcons have only a single family of birds near to them and those are the caracas witch have a quite falcon like appearance. Professional biologist always had a hard placing the falcons with the "other hawks",
Specialist Elbr
Member
@TeaLovingDave, @FelipeDBKO, @vogelcommando
I feel that my formulation of the question is more well defined than the original post. Using this revised definition I would agree with FelipeDBKO that old-world vultures and new-world vultures they are not surprisingly unrelated.
There was a time in the 90s that scientist found indications that new-world vultures were more closely related to storks than old-world vultures. However when the picture came into focus those ides did not fit the bigger picture. If those ideas had turned out right then I would side for TeaLovingDave and vogelcommando.
When you look at three different clades. Clade A that only has new-world vultures Clade B that only has old-world vultures Clade C that the smallest clade to contain both clade. When you look at a close up image of old-world vultures and new-world vultures, they only have a general hawk-like appearance in common. When looking from a distance there bulk outline and there behavior is the only thing they would make you think they are the same. Other than the secretary bird there is no bird in clade C that looks that very dissimilar to either vulture.
I guess the fact that the secretary bird was not related to other long-legged might be surprising. Although it doesn't take too much imagination to thing a secretary bird was an eagle that evolved long legs. If I had not found it on the tree, I probably would have put it close the falcon/caracara clade.
I feel that my formulation of the question is more well defined than the original post. Using this revised definition I would agree with FelipeDBKO that old-world vultures and new-world vultures they are not surprisingly unrelated.
There was a time in the 90s that scientist found indications that new-world vultures were more closely related to storks than old-world vultures. However when the picture came into focus those ides did not fit the bigger picture. If those ideas had turned out right then I would side for TeaLovingDave and vogelcommando.
When you look at three different clades. Clade A that only has new-world vultures Clade B that only has old-world vultures Clade C that the smallest clade to contain both clade. When you look at a close up image of old-world vultures and new-world vultures, they only have a general hawk-like appearance in common. When looking from a distance there bulk outline and there behavior is the only thing they would make you think they are the same. Other than the secretary bird there is no bird in clade C that looks that very dissimilar to either vulture.
I guess the fact that the secretary bird was not related to other long-legged might be surprising. Although it doesn't take too much imagination to thing a secretary bird was an eagle that evolved long legs. If I had not found it on the tree, I probably would have put it close the falcon/caracara clade.
I'm not sure I agree. In a severely pedantic sense (and I always appreciate that), you're right of course. However, your formulation would include taxa that looked similar as a result of plesiomorphic traits (eg. tarsiers and strepsirrhines), and therefore through homology. To me at least, Felipe's wording avoids that better.
Actually, I don't think the question is particularly well defined for a different reason, because it's not clear what exactly he's interested in. You could legitimately interpret it to be a discussion of mimicry, homoplasy (if I were being pedantic, I'd argue this isn't the same as convergence), and even evolutionary constraints or stasis. The latter again could be permissible by Felipe's wording, but wouldn't be from yours.
Take it easy, or the title will be bigger than the explanation! I specified the subject better than just what's in the title.
I actually I never said that old-world vultures and new-world vultures aren't surprising unrelated, and what I said was a mistake... Old-world vultures are closer to some other birds than new-world vultures.
I actually I never said that old-world vultures and new-world vultures aren't surprising unrelated, and what I said was a mistake... Old-world vultures are closer to some other birds than new-world vultures.
Take it easy, or the title will be bigger than the explanation! I specified the subject better than just what's in the title.
I actually I never said that old-world vultures and new-world vultures aren't surprising unrelated, and what I said was a mistake... Old-world vultures are closer to some other birds than new-world vultures.
I actually I never said that old-world vultures and new-world vultures aren't surprising unrelated, and what I said was a mistake... Old-world vultures are closer to some other birds than new-world vultures.
jbnbsn99
Well-Known Member
The title has already been changed once.
Kakapo
Well-Known Member
Hornbills and toucans.
Swifts and swallows.
Lots of marsupials and the equivalent ecological matches within placentals (wombat/badger, numbat/anteater, devil/wolverine, marsupial mole/mole, many smaller marsupials/rodents, etc)
Storks and cranes.
Tuataras and lizards.
Moonrat and solenodons (tough they're more or less related, but moonrat is a hedgehog). Maybe better moonrat with Virginia opossum.
Buttonquails and quails.
Antlions and dragonflies.
Hatchet herrings (Pristigaster spp) and hatchetfishes (Gasteropelecidae)
Alcids and penguins.
Horseshoe crabs and decapod crustaceans.
Grass lizard (a kind of girdled lizard!) and more typical legless lizards such as anguids.
Sandgrouses and partridges.
Sturgeons and sharks.
Caecilians and earthworms.
Ricaniid planthoppers and moths.
Knifefishes (Apteronotidae, Gymnotidae) and knifefishes (Notopteridae)
Pangolins and armadillos (maybe a bit forced but..)
Brachiopods and bivalves.
Hummingbirds, sunbirds and honeycreepers.
Jellyfishes (Scyphozoa) and freshwater jellyfish (that is an hydrozoan).
Of course, all the circle of batesian mimics: a lot of beetles, flies, spiders, grasshoppers and more that mimics perfectly wasps, ants, velvet ants, lycid beetles, etc, as well as unrelated butterflies/moths that mimics perfectly toxic butterflies/moths (Hypolimnas misippus and Limenitis archippus with monarchs, Epicopeia and some zygaenid moths with swallowtails, Alcides agathyrsus and Papilio laglaizei, etc etc.. there are infinite)
Regarding extinct groups: nautilus and ammonites, phytosaurs and crocodylians, ichthyosaurus and dolphins, pliosauroid plesiosaurus and mosasaurs (the latter are actually related with snakes more than something else)
Swifts and swallows.
Lots of marsupials and the equivalent ecological matches within placentals (wombat/badger, numbat/anteater, devil/wolverine, marsupial mole/mole, many smaller marsupials/rodents, etc)
Storks and cranes.
Tuataras and lizards.
Moonrat and solenodons (tough they're more or less related, but moonrat is a hedgehog). Maybe better moonrat with Virginia opossum.
Buttonquails and quails.
Antlions and dragonflies.
Hatchet herrings (Pristigaster spp) and hatchetfishes (Gasteropelecidae)
Alcids and penguins.
Horseshoe crabs and decapod crustaceans.
Grass lizard (a kind of girdled lizard!) and more typical legless lizards such as anguids.
Sandgrouses and partridges.
Sturgeons and sharks.
Caecilians and earthworms.
Ricaniid planthoppers and moths.
Knifefishes (Apteronotidae, Gymnotidae) and knifefishes (Notopteridae)
Pangolins and armadillos (maybe a bit forced but..)
Brachiopods and bivalves.
Hummingbirds, sunbirds and honeycreepers.
Jellyfishes (Scyphozoa) and freshwater jellyfish (that is an hydrozoan).
Of course, all the circle of batesian mimics: a lot of beetles, flies, spiders, grasshoppers and more that mimics perfectly wasps, ants, velvet ants, lycid beetles, etc, as well as unrelated butterflies/moths that mimics perfectly toxic butterflies/moths (Hypolimnas misippus and Limenitis archippus with monarchs, Epicopeia and some zygaenid moths with swallowtails, Alcides agathyrsus and Papilio laglaizei, etc etc.. there are infinite)
Regarding extinct groups: nautilus and ammonites, phytosaurs and crocodylians, ichthyosaurus and dolphins, pliosauroid plesiosaurus and mosasaurs (the latter are actually related with snakes more than something else)
Last edited:
The two mammals that I find appear to have a striking similarity to each other are the lowland paca (a rodent) and the water chevrotain (an ungulate).
I was interested in this and on looking it up, have found this scientific paper comparing the two species in pretty minute detail - looking at the external appearance of the body, osteology, anatomy, ecology and behaviour. It found that the average similarity between the two species was closer than average dissimilarity. The paper in question is included below; it is interesting to see a collation of water chevrotain behaviour, as much as anything else:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1631069117300240
I was interested in this and on looking it up, have found this scientific paper comparing the two species in pretty minute detail - looking at the external appearance of the body, osteology, anatomy, ecology and behaviour. It found that the average similarity between the two species was closer than average dissimilarity. The paper in question is included below; it is interesting to see a collation of water chevrotain behaviour, as much as anything else:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1631069117300240
You know what I always found interesting?
Maned Wolf and Marsh Deer.
Would love to know what's going on there. Is one mimicking the other? Or are those colours inherently beneficial in the pampas? Or is it just total coincidence?
Maned Wolf and Marsh Deer.
Would love to know what's going on there. Is one mimicking the other? Or are those colours inherently beneficial in the pampas? Or is it just total coincidence?