First living things on land clarification | Cosmology & Astronomy | Khan Academy

First living things on land clarification | Cosmology & Astronomy | Khan Academy


In the video on the Cambrian
explosion, I talk about how surprisingly, or
somewhat surprisingly, that animals were the first to
colonize or to move on land. They did that before plants did. And someone brought
up what I thought was a very good question. If the animals were the
first, what did they eat? So I thought that was
one, a good question. So it justified a whole
video on clarifying exactly who was
first on the land. So right here, this is a
picture of algae on the coast. This is kind of algal
scum right over here. So this right here is algae. And just to be clear,
sometimes cyanobacteria, which we talked about as the
first photosynthetic organism, sometimes that’s called
blue-green algae. But that’s really bacteria. Algae is considered
to be eukaryotic. And it just doesn’t have the
structures of modern plants. So this is algae right here. And our best estimate
is that algae actually colonized kind of coastal rocks
about 1.2 billion years ago. So this is 1.2 billion
years ago, “g” giga, billion years ago. So if you wanted the first
thing that even resembled or was close to plants or animals,
and if you consider algae close to a plant, then this
would be the winner of who got on land first. This is 1.2 billion years ago. Now in the last video where I
talk about animals colonizing the land first,
they weren’t animals that only existed on land. They would have been
animals that probably spent most of their time in the ocean
collecting food or whatever. And then they would show up
on the land maybe to lay eggs. And if you think about
it, back then the land would have been a
really good place to lay eggs because
there wouldn’t have been much else on the land. So you would have been
protected from predators. So it might have been
slug-like creatures like this. Some people talk about kind
of spider-like creatures. But it still would
have been at the coast. And these would
have been creatures that would have spend a
lot of time in the ocean and some time in their land. So this is what I was
referring to as kind of animals colonizing the
land before plants. And this would have happened
about 530 million years ago. Now, the first living organisms
to fully live on the land, their whole life is on the
land, those would be plants. So it depends if you think about
things that part of their life, you’d get the animals. Things that lived their
whole life on the land, then you go back to the plants. So this right here,
this is what we think the first primitive
plants would have looked like. And the evidence–
we actually don’t have fossils from these
plants themselves. We have fossils of their spores. But we think that the earliest
fossils of their spores, which show that
these existed, were about 475 million years ago. So this is– let me do
this in another color– this right over here is
475 million years ago. So 1.2 billion years
ago, you have the algae. 530 million years
ago, we have evidence of things kind of
oozing out of the ocean and maybe laying their
eggs or something. 475 million years
ago, we have evidence of what we would kind
of call really plants. But the evidence is really
the fossils of their spores. And then the first
evidence of real– I guess you could
call them animals that spend their entire life on
the land, the oldest fossil we have– it was discovered
in Scotland fairly recently, in 2004. And this is the fossil
right over here. It was actually discovered by
a bus driver, by Mike Newman. Mike Newman, who is a
bus driver in Scotland. And they actually named
the thing after him. It’s called
Pneumodesmus newmani. So they got the newmani
from Mike Newman. And this fossil is
428 million years old. And right now, it’s
the oldest fossil we have of a true land animal. So if you think about true
plants versus true land animals, things that spent
their entire life on the land, the plants do win out. If you think about things
that spent part of their time on the land, then the
animals probably won out. If you view algae as plants,
then the plants won out. So it depends where you
want to draw the line. And this first fossil,
this is of a myriapod which just means a lot of legs. Let me write over
here, myriapod. You probably know
the word “myriad.” Myriad means a bunch of
things or a huge amount. So myriapod, a huge
amount of legs. And you might be familiar with
the millipedes and centipedes. Those are myriapods. And so those first primitive
myriapods, 428 million years ago. And they would have lived
off of plants, and maybe other myriapods,
and other slugs, and whatever other animals
they might have found. They mind have looked
something like that. So hopefully, that gives a
little bit of clarification over– it wasn’t like you
had dogs sitting on the land and they had nothing to eat. It’s kind of a gray area in what
you define a plant or an animal and who gets kind of
the bragging rights for being the first on the land. And it depends on really what
you consider a plant or animal and whether spending
part of your life on the land, whether spending
part of your life on the land will actually qualify.

30 thoughts on “First living things on land clarification | Cosmology & Astronomy | Khan Academy

  1. I just happened to get out of school early today. I was going to watch some of your algebra videos. Thank you for the great knowledge. ๐Ÿ™‚

  2. Before someone bring some arguments about God and no God here, this lesson actually is interpretation of what have scientists,geologists and paleonthologists have discovered from the past from evidence of fossils and rock formations. I believe in God and evolution. Don't start quoting from Bible since I am not a Christian.

  3. @xshadw Why not upload it? because some (like you?) people claim that a tribe 2000 years ago knows about the world better than modern science?

  4. @xcelpast .Read my posting carefuly. I didn't say I am a Christian but I believe in both God and evolution. I don't need to see something to believe it just like Quantum Mechanics said that almost an atomic particle consist of empty space. So According that theory that more than 99 percents of our physical body is empty space but we never seen it.

  5. @charronfamilyconnect Evolution is not a linear progression. Populations splinter off, attempt to thrive in new conditions, and slowly adapt over the passage of unthinkable spans of time. When enough changes have accumulated, the splinter population might reuinite with its parent population and be incompatible. They became a new species, while the parent species continued to be successful in its original environment and changes very little.

  6. @charronfamilyconnect Species migrate. The conditions to be "the fittest" means something completely different in the middle of the jungle than on the riverbank of the nile, or in a temperate climate, during an ice-age, etc… One species can the be ancestor of hundreds of different species that live today.

    Flatworms are considered the first predators in the oceans. The earliest evidence of predation on land is from 550 million years ago, but we don't know how the predator looked like.

  7. Interesting, what is first = Algae, what is Algae? … what I find so interesting that in this basic issue Science is a joke…. people talk sooooo much about the space science… bhal bhal to sell science but the basics seem to be highly obscure: 'They (algae) are no longer, with one possible exception, considered Plants (i.e., members of the plant kingdom)…. So Algae was 1st (makes sense so far) but most of Algae is no longer a plant with one possible exception… perhaps science is being..

  8. @whwsjackfrost Yeah the beginning of the story and what caused the story to unfold to such a degree of variation is a mystery. The point I was making is that we are not products of survival of the fittest cause otherwise why would life diversify if the first stages of simple life forms were doing well on their own. They were thriving and still do today. The question I have is what drives life to become so diversified and why? What is the force behind this? Thanks!

  9. @charronfamilyconnect Oh, well for that answer I would watch Khans introduction to natural selection and the moth video. It explains the concept alot better than I can. It doesn't answer your SPECIFIC question but I think it encompasses it. Mutations happen whether an organism is comfortable or not. But like I said he explains the mechanics ebtter than I can.

  10. can u please send me a message on my channel and tell me when u think fire started to burn life and how…if at all it relates to the evolution of the vascular system in plants

  11. Fascinating stuff. I think I'm going to shoot for the title of 'astrobiologist.' I love evolutionary biology and ecology, but I don't want to be excluded from astrophysics and planetary science. Out of curiosity and since I'm impressed with your knowledge, where and when did you go to school?

  12. เน€เธซเธกเธทเธญเธ™เธเธฑเธ™ เน€เธ•เธขเธŠเธฑเธ™เธŠเธฐ says:

    Thai subtitle please Thanks

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *