On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 19:35:31 +0000, jXwXeXrXmXoXnXt wrote:
> > http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/03/070315-leopard-picture.html
>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> (I'm being facetious here - I just think this sentence doesn't make
> much sense.)
The genes make a tendency towards a particular pattern, but the exact
details of the pattern are determined by the interactions of the hair
follicles as they develop. If an animal is injured, and the skin then
regrows, there will be minor differences from the pattern it had before.
Genetically-identical animals (clones, or identical twins, which are
naturally-occurring clones) will have similar, but not identical,
markings. In the same way, human twins don't have identical fingerprints.

Signature
John F. Eldredge -- john@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better
than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
jXwXeXrXmXoXnXt@sonic.net - 18 Oct 2007 06:33 GMT
> > "The differences aren't all in the genes, either - the two species
> > have different fur patterns and skin coloration."
> >
> > Eh? Fur patterns and skin coloration *don't* get determined by genes?
> > (I'm being facetious here - I just think this sentence doesn't make
> > much sense.)
> The genes make a tendency towards a particular pattern, but the exact
> details of the pattern are determined by the interactions of the hair
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> naturally-occurring clones) will have similar, but not identical,
> markings. In the same way, human twins don't have identical fingerprints.
I see what you're saying. But then, you're talking about the
differences between two individuals within the same species (or
two individuals who have identical DNA), not two different species.
They're saying the two species have different fur patterns, which
I would expect anyway, since their genes will be different.
Joyce
Jack Campin - bogus address - 18 Oct 2007 10:21 GMT
> I don't understand this sentence, though, where this leopard is being
> compared to the snow leopard:
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> (I'm being facetious here - I just think this sentence doesn't make
> much sense.)
The're saying explicitly that the species difference is visible -
there are genetically distinct species that look the same, and given
how similar some of the various big-spotty-cat species look, it's
quite conceivable that two cat species might only be distinguishable
by another cat.
============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ==============
Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557