Cambridge University museum finds 150-year-old platypus specimens
Specimens of mammals that helped support the theory of evolution 150 years ago have been found at a museum.
The platypus and echidna (spiny anteaters) samples discovered at Cambridge University’s Museum of Zoology had been collected in the late 1800s by scientist William Caldwell.
At that time, they were key to proving some mammals laid eggs, and supported the theory of evolution.
Jack Ashby (pictured below), from the museum, said the discovery was “pretty amazing”.
The collection had not been catalogued by the museum, so until recently staff did not know it existed.
Mr Ashby, the museum’s assistant director, said: “I knew from experience that there isn’t a natural history collection on Earth that actually has a comprehensive catalogue of everything in it, and I suspected that Caldwell’s specimens really ought to be here.”
He asked the collections manager to keep an eye out, and the samples were found in a box.
Until Europeans first encountered platypuses and echidnas in the 1790s, it had been assumed that all mammals gave birth to live young.
The question of whether some mammals lay eggs then became hotly debated in scientific circles.
“In the 19th Century, many conservative scientists didn’t want to believe that an egg-laying mammal could exist, because this would support the theory of evolution, the idea that one animal group was capable of changing into another,” Mr Ashby said.
“Lizards and frogs lay eggs, so the idea of a mammal laying eggs was dismissed by many people – I think they felt it was degrading to be related to animals that they considered ‘lower life forms’.”
William Caldwell had been sent to Australia in 1883, with financial backing from the University of Cambridge, the Royal Society and the government, to try and resolve the long-standing debate.
The collection includes echidnas, platypuses and marsupials at varying life stages – from fertilised egg to adolescence.
Mr Ashby said: “It’s one thing to read the 19th Century announcements that platypuses and echidnas actually lay eggs, but to have the physical specimens here, tying us back to that discovery almost 150 years ago, is pretty amazing.”
See more here: bbc.co.uk
All images: Jacqueline Garget
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
MattH
| #
A recently published article in PSI on the science of evolution suggested that for evolution to be a ‘thing’ it would require mutations of the living animal. Of course, this unreasonable reasoning was both mischievous and vexatious.
The evolutionary mutations occur in mammals before birth which is why a group of siblings all look different and have varying heights, identical twins being the evolutionary exception. Often the first born is the shortest.
If you had one hundred families and from those families the tallest males mated with the tallest females and the shortest with the shortest, within ten generations you would have a lineage of relative giants and another of relative animated garden gnomes.
The only debate would be, ‘ are they a distinct species?’
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Matt.
You wrote: “The evolutionary mutations occur in mammals before birth which is why a group of siblings all look different and have varying heights, identical twins being the evolutionary exception.” How could there have been this diversity at the BEGINNING??? And Darwin evidently could not conclude, I don’t know. We have the same problem with gravity and inertia. Newton clearly stated he could not propose a cause (explanation) for gravity because he had not observed any phenomenon which pointed to a cause. Hence, Newton could admit that he did not know. Galileo who taught us the importance of observation and measurement, rejected the careful astronomical measurements of Tycho Brahe and Johannes Kepler careful mathematical analysis of Brahe’s data which demonstrated that the orbits of the planets about the Sun were elliptical and not precise circles because he (Galileo) believed the orbits had to be precise circles.
And given the examples of what we do actually observe and what we have not actually observed has not stopped some from making the same obvious, inconsistent, mistakes over and over. All because it seems some people cannot admit I don’t know and ignore observations that do matter.
Have a good day, Jerry
Do you realize that you just went to the issue which led Darwin to propose his idea to explain his theory. For I believe he was trying to explain how there could have been this all this diversity with in a species at the beginning. Why
Reply
MattH
| #
Hi Jerry and coolest dudes ever.
Identical twins (also called monozygotic twins) result from the fertilization of a single egg by a single sperm, with the fertilized egg then splitting into two. Identical twins share the same genomes and are always of the same sex. In contrast, fraternal (dizygotic) twins result from the fertilization of two separate eggs with two different sperm during the same pregnancy. They share half of their genomes, just like any other siblings. Fraternal twins may not be of the same sex or have similar appearances. (copied and pasted)
One can therefore safely conclude that genetic variations occur in the development of the egg or development of the sperm or both, preconception.
Then comes adaptation. If there is a severe drought and the only food source for hundreds of miles are fruit hanging ten feet off the ground or higher then it will be the tall people and those adept at tree climbing who will survive.
Conversely, if there is an abundance of predators such as the Abusive Tapley Tyrannosaur or the Profanity Ejaculating Alcheminister Tiger eating people and the only safe haven is a cave with an opening aperture so small that a barrel chested six foot tall man could not fit through then the more slightly built will be the breeders.
The term ‘survival of the fittest’ could be better described as survival of those best able to adapt and survive a changing environment. Some men still have heavy hair on their back and chest while people who evolved under tropical skies are less inclined to be hairy.
Footnote; Whilst the Howdy Hyena is not a dangerous predator it does tend to follow the more dangerous predators and if sighted can be a warning that danger is at hand.
Cheers. Matt
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
Hello MattH:
The breeding process you are referring to has nothing to do with mutations but is just the normal expression of dominant and recessive genes. Breeding the tallest to the tallest will tend to result in a taller average over time but this is also limited within the genes. We see the same thing with animals and plants. Mutations are not the natural result of normal variations within the organism but rather an aberration that occurs when a part of the genes, (strands of proteins) are dropped out of the chain. There are ap. 5000 mutations known to occur in humans. None of them are beneficial. Most are benign, some are very harmful and some are deadly.
These mutations cannot create any new “species” or as Darwin called it, “new kinds” because there has only been a loss of genetic material, no new genetic material, no new code added (there would have to be whole chromosomes made) no new building blocks. A mule and a hinney is a mutation caused by the mismatched chromosomes in horses and donkeys, but it is not a new species. Mules have been known to have offspring but it is extremely rare. God has designed organisms so that they have natural limits and always tend to revert to the mean. Same thing with plants. If you have to closely related plants, you can graft one on the other, such as pecan and hickory. But even though pecans are a relative of the walnut, they are not close enough to accept each other.
Reply
MattH
| #
Science has come a long way since the bible was written.
Many native peoples have myths and legends because they did not have the science to understand the natural world.
People telling half truths and lies to impose beliefs over relatively sound scientific hypothesis are little different than those orchestrating climate change corruption and Covid ‘vaccine related filth.
Belief systems are fine but when imposed on others is tyranny. Best eliminated in infancy.
Reply
Mark Tapley
| #
What myths, legends and half truths are you referring too? And what beliefs are being imposed by whom and what good is a relatively scientific hypothesis? How can belief systems be eliminated in infancy when infants have no belief system and are not even at an age of accountability?
Reply
Howdy
| #
“Science has come a long way since the bible was written.”
Or at least it had, until it devolved into what we now have, where the genuine are consigned to the background noise of other’s ludicrous claims and self-glorification, or chasing of pipe-dreams. Science is a religion of self-serving in itself, where status means more than result, and fact.
Reply