Comment

Comment on >:)>

Not necessarily, with “genetic drift” random phenotypic changes can happen that have a neutral effect on fitness. So if they don’t need side-facing eyes, then this can just happen randomly. Especially if the sideways eyes are in some way “costly” to maintain

source

Sort:hotnew top

kurwa@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
If sideways eyes are “costly” compared to forward facing eyes, then that would technically be a push for forward facing.

source
- jol@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  Or goats just find forward facing eyes to be sexier.
  
  source
  - swab148@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    I know I do
    
    source
    AFKBRBChocolate@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    <Gives you the side eye>
    
    source
  - Bear_pile@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    There was an interesting study done with zebra finches. In it they glued fake mohawkes on males and found that females selected them over unaltered males, even though it didn’t naturally occur in the species. So there is some precedence for the possibility that the forward facing eyes were simply “sexier”.
    
    source
    jol@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    I mean you can do a smoldering sexy look at someone if your eyes face sideways. Makes total sense.
    
    source
- stephen01king@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  Depth perception.
  
  source
  - kurwa@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    Derception.
    
    source
    OrteilGenou@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    Derpception
    
    source
BleatingZombie@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
I’ve always wondered if there was a term for evolutionary changes that weren’t needed!

source