I suspect it was probably a less deadly toxin beforehand(given that the family castor is in, Euphorbiaceae, are notoriously likely to be poisonous) although the subject of plant evolution in general is poorly studied and I would not be surprised if this has never been looked into.

It's a complicated question since depending on the theory you use, the definition of intelligence change. The IQ is getting more and more controversed. Another concept is intelligence split in 8 sphere, (i don't recall all of them but for exemple music is one of them) being intelligent would mean to have an easier time acquiring skills in this field or to have accumulated a vast ammount of knowledge.

Let's just say that there isn't a global consensus on what define intelligence yet.

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

>genetic mutation is not random

You were doing really good up until this point... Then I stated rereading your whole post and I'm pretty confident the latter half is mostly inaccurate.

E: actually, besides the 3 types of RNA, this is entirely inaccurate.

E2: Whatever bs you just tried coming back with got auto hidden. The person you were referring to doesn't have peer reviewed studies on the topic anyway.

E3: idk why you keep getting auto hidden, likely poor behavior. Anyway, obviously RNA can't repair missing data, that's literally not it's job... Dunno why you tried to change the subject though.

E4: whelp, you're a lost cause, 3 comments and not a single one shows up.

[removed]

[removed]

This website is the first result when I Google that name! Thanks for the tip, I'll spend hours laughing at this crank.

[removed]

I don't really see them falling into that pit. I read the question more in the following sense: If an individual randomly has additional or fewer chromosomes, and reproduction with all the other individuals having the standard number of chromosomes is difficult, then how come so many species did manage to reproduce after introducing or losing new chromosomes?

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

Your premise is incorrect. During reproduction, the chromosomes have to line up in order for them to produce offspring. The number of chromosomes is important but it's not clear exactly how difficult the chromosome number makes for reproduction, relative to other factors, and it depends on where and how the chromosome number changed. It is not the barrier to evolution that it is portrayed in anti-evolution literature.

People with Down's syndrome can and do reproduce and they have an extra chromosome. Consider Robertsonian translocations. which can reduce the number of chromosomes. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robertsonian_translocation

Of course, the most famous 'cross' is a male donkey and a female horse to produce a mule, which is sterile. However, there are a large number of equine species, and they have wildly different numbers of chromosomes. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equid_hybrid and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebroid . Some of the crosses are fertile; for example, Przewalski's horse (66 chromosomes) and domestic horses (64 chromosomes) can and do produce fertile offspring.

Scientists can study the changes that have occurred in the number chromosomes, their shape (lengths of arms for example), banding patterns, etc. (this is called the karyotype of the organism) in related to help understand the evolutionary history of them. See, for example: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23532666/ which focuses on equines. However, the same thing can be done for much more distant species. See this which reconstructs different chromosomes a wide diversity of animal: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2209139119 Figure 2 in particular shows how the chromosomes line up, and what happened as they split, merged, grew, and shrank.

Summary: reproduction between individuals with different numbers of chromosomes can and does happen. The history of related (both near and far) animals provides evidence for what changes occurred in chromosome number (and shape, and banding, etc.).

[removed]

[removed]

Yes. Their children, however, would end up with 45 chromosomes, which would make it difficult, but not impossible, for them to reproduce. Their family has a long history of miscarriages, unfortunately.