BBC Focus Magazine

[erykpilat]

I was always wondering about that one. Which was first; the chicken or egg?

[Shadowwolf]

The egg, the dinos and other egg laying creatures were around long before the chicken or birds for that matter had evolved.

[The Beige Avenger]

and before them?

Shadow is technically correct; however, I feel it misses the point and the magnitude of the question...

Depending on how you look at the question, the answer is a definite "chicken" or "egg"

[Ush]

I don't think the chicken-egg question is supposed to be interpreted literally.

[M Paul Lloyd]

I remember this one from the old forum... the best answer I can recall was that a creature trhat was almost a chicken laid an egg that hatched the first true chicken.

So the egg came first.

[Doonhamer]

Correct MPL, before the chicken came something almost a chicken and before that something slightly less like a chicken etc etc.....
So, as you say, at some point in the gradual evolution of the chicken we have to draw a line and say Chicken! And that very chicken must have hatched from an egg laid by it's non-chicken, but extremely chicken-like parent...

[Nails]

A situation which only exposes the frailty of the definition of a species.

At what point does an evolutionary line become a chicken?
When one individual is 99.5% chicken?
When 25% of the population are genetically chickens?

Species works as a concept in the here and now, but now over a period of time.

Even ring species can stretch the conceot to the limit (or maybe even beyond)

But my answer would defo be the egg, they appeared on earth before animals had first colonised the land - so we are looking at cambrain era, around 500 mya (some fish lay eggs, they just don't have the hard shell but are definately eggs) - Finding Nemo is an example my little one likes.....

The eggs we are familiar with are reptilian in origin, so date back to around 200 mya, before birds and long before chickens.

[M Paul Lloyd]

Am I right in thinking that chickens are the decendants of T-Rex?????

[The Beige Avenger]

A situation which only exposes the frailty of the definition of a species.

At what point does an evolutionary line become a chicken?
When one individual is 99.5% chicken?
When 25% of the population are genetically chickens?

Species works as a concept in the here and now, but now over a period of time.

Even ring species can stretch the conceot to the limit (or maybe even beyond)

But my answer would defo be the egg, they appeared on earth before animals had first colonised the land - so we are looking at cambrain era, around 500 mya (some fish lay eggs, they just don't have the hard shell but are definately eggs) - Finding Nemo is an example my little one likes.....

The eggs we are familiar with are reptilian in origin, so date back to around 200 mya, before birds and long before chickens.

This is more like it.

Although I was taking it further back in my mind, questioning what "the egg" actually means and that it must have come from a life form.... and by a stretch of the imagination, this life form could be called a metaphorical "chicken"

[Shadowwolf]

Well at some point there were two almost chickens that mated and fertilised an egg, the egg grew a solid shell, got deposited and eventually hatched a chicken, all the while that egg contained the first chicken.

As we go back we travel through the various ancestors of the almost chickens, birds and on into reptiles, go further back — a lot further — and we get into simple multi-cellular organisms and such like and eventually single cells. Go far enough and our metaphorical chicken came before the egg but bears no resemblance to our beloved breakfast and dinner supplier.

[Esther]

You don't have to go that far back to unravel the mysteries of chickens - they are exclusively a domestic critter, bred from jungle fowl, which still exist in the wild. Chickens are Gallus gallus domesticus, and the fowl they are descended from are Gallus gallus, possibly hybridised with a one or two other wild fowl types (cue long discussion on what makes species separate...).

[The Beige Avenger]

Well at some point there were two almost chickens that mated and fertilised an egg, the egg grew a solid shell, got deposited and eventually hatched a chicken, all the while that egg contained the first chicken.

As we go back we travel through the various ancestors of the almost chickens, birds and on into reptiles, go further back — a lot further — and we get into simple multi-cellular organisms and such like and eventually single cells. Go far enough and our metaphorical chicken came before the egg but bears no resemblance to our beloved breakfast and dinner supplier.

And that, to me, is what the question is about.

Turtles, all the way down.

[Ush]

The evolution answer misses the point of the question.

This is better:

The chicken or the egg causality dilemma is commonly stated as "which came first, the chicken or the egg?" To ancient philosophers, the question about the first chicken or egg also evoked the questions of how life and the universe in general began.[1]

Cultural references to the chicken and egg intend to point out the futility of identifying the first case of a circular cause and consequence. It could be considered that in this approach lies the most fundamental nature of the question. A literal answer is somewhat obvious, as egg-laying species predate the existence of chickens. However, the metaphorical view sets a metaphysical ground to the dilemma. To better understand its metaphorical meaning, the question could be reformulated as: "Which came first, X that can't come without Y, or Y that can't come without X?"

An equivalent situation arises in engineering and science known as circular reference, in which a parameter is required to calculate that parameter itself. Examples are Van der Waals equation and the famous Colebrook equation.

…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_or_the_egg

[Nails]

Am I right in thinking that chickens are the decendants of T-Rex?????

They certainly share a common ancestor, as for direct descendants I don't think so.
Early birds were much more like raptors - although if memory serves early T-rex were smaller than the stereotypical late Jurassic image we all have and are basically raptors with reduced forelimbs and a bone-crunching bite - as opposed to raptors typical flesh-tearing bite and huge claws on the front limbs, as well as the 'killing claw' which is typical of Velocoraptors.
Something tells me a turkey is a closer relative, i think there was some protein analysis comparison a few years ago?

Well at some point there were two almost chickens that mated and fertilised an egg, the egg grew a solid shell, got deposited and eventually hatched a chicken, all the while that egg contained the first chicken.

As we go back we travel through the various ancestors of the almost chickens, birds and on into reptiles, go further back — a lot further — and we get into simple multi-cellular organisms and such like and eventually single cells. Go far enough and our metaphorical chicken came before the egg but bears no resemblance to our beloved breakfast and dinner supplier.

So it wasn't a chicken then!
The egg has evolved as well as the species that laid it.

Personally I don't like the philosophical side of this debate, for me the answer is clear and there is no circular reasoning involved.
Philosophy is just reasoning based on extrapolation and our mental processes, the evidence gives a much clearer picture.

[Colm]

If you really want an answer, then you have to rephrase the question. Which came first, the egg, or the egg-layer? What is the most recent common ancestor between us mammals and chickens?

If we go back to the very first life forms, the primordial soup as it were, I don't think we can make any comparisons between them and either mammals or egg-layers, since they only kind of split like cells.

We have to get to the point that it became necessary to incubate young before giving birth. How did they develop? Did we first have internal incubation (such as mammals do), and then one mutation resulted in the mother ejecting the faetus in a sort of proto-egg? If that is the case, then the chicken came first.

But if it was the other way around, and the cell-splitting developed into an egg-like structure which allowed more complex organisms, but then the internal incubators (such as mammals) branched off from that, then we can say the egg came first.

In any case, which came first, the paradox or the philosopher?

[Doonhamer]

Seems it was chicken!

http://sify.com/news/the-chicken-may-ha ... jedjc.html

[Vasmark]

There was something on the radio this morning, some university with too much time on their hands and/or a thirst for media attention identified an egg making enzyme made by the chook, thus the chicken came first.

As I see it, almost chicken meets almost chicken, almost chicken falls for almost chicken, almost chicken and almost chicken have pure chicken offspring. thus whatever came before the pure chicken was not a pure chicken and therefore the egg came first.

I'm sure it's more complicated than that when you get down to it, what with enzymes, evolution and such but at the end of the day it's a chicken and they taste nice roasted with gravy and mashed potato and that's all I really care about.

[Shadowwolf]

Seems it was chicken!

Does a chicken egg shell protein count as a chicken?

Anyhoo I like the above answer, it tastes good and in a variety of foods as do eggs so who cares

[Bigsmak]

Some humour!

[Gabriel]

Depending on how you look at the question, the answer is a definite "chicken" or "egg"

What an old question¡ As The Beige Avenger said, it depends on the point of view, I mean with the theory that you are talking about. What do I mean whit this? For example, when I asked my biology teacher(she`s a darwinist), she said the egg. Because in the darwinist perspective, a genetic mutation that lead to chicken species occurs in the egg. It´s the genetic configuration that defines an species (Maturana, 1997) as a genetically closed system of interbreeding population (Mayr, 1963). In comparison with this, in the systemic/historic perspective, the chicken came first in its phylogeny, as a conservation of the ontogenic phenotype chicken, that defines the chicken species, and it`s conserved generation after generation (Maturana & Mpodozis, 2000).
My purpose was not try to say who was right and who`s not. My intention was just present the answer according to the most accepted and used theories in contemporary biology: the modern synthesis theory and the natural drift theory.
And what do you think, guys?
Literature cited
Maturana, H.(1997) Emociones y Lenguaje en Educación y Política. Sáez J.C.(ed). Santiago, Chile.
Maturana, H.,Mpodozis, J.(2000) The origin of species by means of natural drift. Rev Chil Hist Nat; 73(2): 261-310.
Mayr, E.(1963) Animal species and evolution: 28-437. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass.