I learned sometime before covid that there's a breed of rabbit that can't even hop. Can you imagine?

Everyone complaining about the time covered but no one talking about the cute little delicate placement of the paws on the garbage can to establish stability, the brief distraction of the fly, how absolutely lean and precision carved this adorable little lady is (and if not a lady, intersex at the very least as orange and black are mutually exclusive X chromosome characteristics). She's almost wearing a tortoiseshell tuxedo. I'll bet she's under 2 years old and very friendly.

Please send help, I'm horribly allergic to cats and can't pet them without wearing a face mask but I love them and need all of them.

Someone wrote a book about it in 2013.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cra0akxWEAA1IAg.jpg

>adjectives in English absolutely have to be in this order: opinion-size-age-shape-colour-origin-material-purpose Noun. So you can have a loverly little old rectangular green French silver whittling knife. But if you mess with that word order in the slightest you'll sound like a maniac. It's an odd thing that every English speaker uses that list, but almost none of us could write it out. And as size comes before colour, green great dragons can't exist.

I don't think there are any stone fruit that have seedless varieties. Cherry, avocado, peach, etc. Seedless watermelon they create a hybrid of two different watermelon. Like a mule, these hybrids are sterile and only have malformed seeds if any. Pluots are a hybrid and you'll notice that they still have a stone... but sometimes it's only half there or not properly formed. Even seedless oranges can have the odd seed. How they make something seedless depends on how the fruit reproduces and sometimes sterility doesn't yield the desired results if creating sterile fruit is even a realistic process.

Bananas aren't seedless, nor strawberries (I know they're not actually the seeds), nor raspberries... most berries if not all don't have seedless varieties. Some fruit has seedless varieties but the vast majority of the fruit we cultivate isn't seedless.

There's a theory they might have found it on Crete recently, actually.

I'm talking 1980 to about 2003. So that wouldn't contradict this site hosting the information even for two decades.

Except with tigons and ligers! My favorite example of assumed sterility. Apparently the whole world just forgot they weren't actually sterile for 20 years.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nindia.2017.46

I can never find the article where a zoo had a tigon enclosed with an opposite sex tiger and was so surprised when they had babies.

Cows and humans gestate for the same length of time, oddly enough. But they do mature a lot faster...

I told a lady once that she really shouldn't give her infant honey because of the botulism risk and she just flat out said that I was making it up.

They do goats and sheep and some wierdos even horse but cows are just the best at it. It's also weird that they have 4 teats but typically only have one calf. That's not usually how it goes with mammals. Sheep, horses, and... goats? I can't remember if it's the same with goats... but they've all just got two. And goats and sheep are often bred for twinning. So wtf going on with cows and their super mammaries.

You do realize that human milking and mastitis risk is dramatically different from cows... The structure of their mammaries is completely different. For one, you can't hand-milk a person the way you can a cow. A cow the milk practically falls out so yes the suction pumps are actually more effective than a calf's sucking.

Hormones are part of it because even machine milking is more effective if the cows can see or have recently fed their calves but in a human? It's almost all hormonal. You can get a couple ounces just by relaxing but you can't even get a full meal for the little sucker without practically meditating on how much you love that little gummy smile.

Humans have not been selectively bred for 10000 years for milk yield. We have, however, evolved our guts to be able to produce lactase enzymes for our entire lives. I struck out though. I produce lactase but my immune system freaks out if it sees whey.

And doing AI for all the breeding... when you could just rent a bull and let him do the work? Or hek, with enough cows you can just provide your own bull and do bull-swaps with a neighboring farm. Why would you pay for something the bull will do for free? Maybe if you're on a tight schedule... but still... a cow's routine healthcare involves sticking your hand up their butts all the time. You're lucky that human healthcare splurges on expensive scanning tools now and that our organs are a lot smaller so palpating things through the intestinal wall isn't very helpful or that's what we'd be getting too.

And just buy milk from a farm that keeps the calves with the mommas. Be the change you want to see in the industry.

Man, nobody here with the answers.

Selective breeding for the last 10k years.

A heifer is an unbred female cow. Heifers do not produce milk. A dairy heifer is going to be a cow of a dairy breed, Jersey, Gurnsey, Holstein, there's a lot. Beef heifers are never the same breed as a dairy heifer even though they're functionally the same at that life stage.

Once a cow is bred it'll go in one of two directions. The beef cows only produce enough milk for their calves but all mammals produce milk with a supply/demand method (generally). The more milk a calf drinks, the more milk a cow produces. So until weaning begins supply slowly increases with the calf's appetite. For some things you might be able to get some excess milk even from a beef cow but nowhere near the quantities you get from a dairy cow.

When dairy cows have their calf they do generally get promptly removed from momma. But momma is still useless for milking at this point. She's not producing milk. She's producing colostrum. Colostrum is discarded by some farmers, milked and fed to the calf by other farmers. Either way it has to be milked from the cow. Milk production starts quickly, though, as colostrum is only ever at temporary thing. The calf is always removed because cows are on the farm to work and where a beef cow's job is to make meat (which they can do by making more cows) a dairy cow's job is to produce milk.

A dairy cow that has already had at least one calf and is due to have another will actually go dry shortly before she has the calf. Her glands are switching back to colostrum mode.

Dairy cows produce so much milk that their udders are gigantic compared to a beef cow's, even when both are lactating. They produce so much more milk than any single calf could ever drink. They also don't necessarily produce the sort of milk a farmer wants to feed to the calves. Calves drink fortified reconstituted milk (made from dried milk that's had a blend of nutrients added).

The reason why a cow's milk and their calf's needs don't necessarily line up is because of the selective breeding bit. We want cow's milk to taste a certain way. But we also want calves to get a certain sort of nutrition. The nutritional needs of a calf, particularly one you're raising for a specific purpose, is not going to give you the stereotypical flavor of milk, cheese, and yogurt you get in the store.

You take away the human element and yes, a dairy cow and calf could easily stay together and we'd still have plenty of milk. But there's no profit in producing milk. Farmers make pennies per gallon so in order to stay solvent they have to maximize production and quality. So the only time you're going to see a farm where they can keep the calves with dairy cow mommas is a farm that likely packs and sells the product themselves rather than selling it to a factory or brand.

Sauce: I grew up in a farming community for 20 years and visited dozens of mom and pop farms providing cow healthcare and saw the whole industry as seen through the eyes of farmers with less than 10,000 cows.

Internet says it's not directly inherited. Which makes sense since it's a mutation during meiosis so the resulting gamete would be XX, XY, X-, or Y-. In order to be inhereted the germ-line cells would all have to be XX or XY in someone with three chromosomes and would be incomplete in someone who had only partial XX or XY and they would likely have pretty severe fertility issues. At least 50% of all first trimester miscarriages are due to chromosomal instability, and being XXY, X, X+, Y, Y+, or XYY all qualifies. For contrast, the number of chromosomally abnormal living people is about .5%. If all the germ line cells of someone who was chromosomally abnormal were also abnormal... that's not great odds for having kids.

Male XYY aren't sterile, but male XXY usually are - but this is because of their testes not working properly, not necessarily what they would produce if they had functional ones.

Most Turner's women are sterile for the same reason - their ovaries just don't work properly. OP lucked out that the ordinary redundancy of the second ovary yielded a functional one and is a perfect example that their gametes are not effected by their own abnormality.

We can't prove or disprove it with our current knowledge. Educated guesses are still guesses and 60 might be very unlikely (just as 30 is for homo sapien) it's still within the realm of possibility for such wildly speculative topics such as this. The realm of possibility tends to be extreme.

>Humans have less sexual dimorphism than the other great apes

Compared to H. Erectus, it's dramatic... at least until 2020. I see I'm behind the times.

>they weren't larger than modern humans

Where am I getting my science these days, smh...

>This is not a realistic birth spacing

It's not. I was unclear, I see. This is the average length of time between one birth and the conception of the next. Humans are physically capable of getting pregnant immediately after birth but unlikely to do so for roughly six months. Add in the six months it takes for the average length of time for conception and you've got a year. This was looking at the maximum number possible, rather than what's probable, because everything is pure speculation anyway.

Yeah, I suppose OP was asking about averages and not most physically possible. Also your second link cause me physical pain.

And your post is just as much speculation as we have no idea the lifespan or how long homo erectus would remain fertile in that lifespan. You're also not considering the high infant mortality rates where many mothers had 10 children or more historically but only some would survive to adulthood. Not to mention lack of birth control - we have no idea what their mating practices were that functioned to avoid over saturating their environment, if any.

In short, I said we've got no idea and your comment supports that.

Not necessarily. Cows and humans both gestate for 9 months and yet baby cows are fully precocious and many times larger than a human infant.

Men tend towards larger upper body size, heavier musculature, larger overall skeleton, higher quantities and more locations for body hair, etc.

Women tend towards lighter frames, larger hips, gozongas, less body hair in fewer places, etc.

Men and women even store fat differently after puberty with women storing it more subcutaneously (better insulation for the baby cooker) and men storing it more around their vital organs (bad for your long term health but good for protecting your organs in combat).

Fun fact though... higher estrogen in women and higher testosterone in men has a similar effect on the vocal cords, making the voice deeper. Men get that deep bass like Vin Diesel and women get that sultry husky voice like Scarlett Johansson.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3528014/

>Hypothesis 2: Spontaneous Decidualization evolved for embryo selection
>
>A more recent idea, with experimental support, argues that SD evolved to allow the mother to sense embryo quality upon implantation. Teklenburg et al. [24] used a human co-culture model to study the interaction between decidualizing ESCs and blastocysts and found that ESCs trigger a strong response against impaired embryos but only upon differentiation into decidual cells. These authors argue that SD evolved to compensate for the high rate of chromosomal abnormalities in human embryos, allowing the mother to limit her investment in bad embryos. In support of this hypothesis, the same group showed that women with impaired decidualization responses are not able to sense embryo quality, evidenced by increased fecundity but also recurrent pregnancy failure [25].

It's not the only reason, but it is likely one of the reasons behind why humans menstruate so frequently. It's a waste of resources so there would ostensibly need to be some sort of evolutionary pressure that makes it a valid expenditure. Prioritizing your best embryos and discarding less than ideal ones minimizes nutrient loss rather than find out later after a significant time and resource investment that you've got a nonviable pregnancy.

Am US but I've been told I use weird phrases and words and my spouse inexplicably is offended by my pronunciation of orange.

Some states that have theoretically eradicated rabies in their animal populations actually drop salt blocks with vaccine in them in high animal traffic areas on their borders to help prevent outbreaks.

https://www.usnews.com/news/news/articles/2022-08-26/usda-scattering-rabies-vaccines-for-wildlife-in-13-states

This article is about a recent effort by the fed but I'm certain some individual states have been doing it for far longer.