INTRODUCTION
This presentation is the third in a series of blogs that uses the example of Cheetahs and Lions to show the survivability effects of evolving specialization. The first in the series lays the foundation of geography, climate and time. The second compared two African cats; Lions and Cheetahs. This presentation introduces the concept of traps. The “traps” are made of time, location, resources and specializations. They put these cats at risk for survival. Survival of the species depends on behavioral modification, physiologic adaptation and selection by desirable mating. We may have exposed ourselves to the same traps. This is not about mechanical traps. These are more insidious.
In The opening video clip – The “traps in this presentation are UNINTENTIONALLY generated by the animal’s remarkable behavior and adaptations. They are more SIGNIFICANT than physical traps
Traps are the delimiters that block biologic adaptation to a changing environment. Inability to overcome traps leads to extinction. It is not about survival of the fittest. It is about survival of the most adaptable. This is the reason to study the survival of these two cats. Understanding the pitfalls will reflect on the survival of everything, specifically us.
In order to discuss unintentional consequences of behavior leading to traps, I suggest that we review of the work of the naturalists of the 18th century. Several theories had been proposed. The most notable is the Theory of Evolution. Darwin and Wallace proposed the foundational ideas. Survival of the fittest forces the origin of species. Additionally, isolation promotes differentiation. In the view of these observers of nature, there is a progressive change in the survival of the majority. I propose an alternative view of the Darwinian theory. Let’s call this the Theory of Specialized Extinction.
THEORY OF EVOLUTION
I respect the pioneering publication of the books of Charles Darwin. These include The Beagle diary (1839), Origin of the Species (1859) and The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (1871). I first read these 66 years ago when I was in high school. Here are the tenants of his theory. My comments are in italics.
Overproduction: Organisms produce more offspring than their local environment can support, which leads to competition for limited resources. Alternatively, it may lead to cooperation, revolution or migration.
Variation: Individuals within a single species naturally display a wide range of variation in their physical traits, behaviors, and genetic makeup. This suggests that there are mutations in the population.
Inheritance: Many of these unique variations are heritable—meaning they can be passed down from parents to their offspring. This does not take into consideration dominant and recessive genes.
Differential Survival & Reproduction: Individuals possessing traits best adapted to their specific environment (“survival of the fittest”) are more likely to survive threats and successfully reproduce. If individuals are highly specialized they may not be able to adapt to the changing environment.
Descent with Modification: Over vast expanses of time, these advantageous traits become more common in the population. Gradually, this accumulation of changes can lead to the emergence of entirely new species. The rate of accumulation of traits depends on the complexity of the organism. The accumulation of traits does not necessarily lead to new species but may lead to species vulnerabilities.
Most of Darwin’s work suggests a time line with a steady progression of change, most of which was deemed to be an improvement. In prospect most of his writing appears to be intrinsically biased. Yes, there is change, however, it is coincidental with “implicit bias”. It does not confirm causality. Additionally, an apex implies that there is a narrowing of differentiation that is progressively better. It presumes the philosophical question of a decision tree which has an apex. It does not imply value to alternative views.
Although it is implied, there is no proof of progressive improvement in the Darwinian model. In fact, as we rapidly degrade the environment the apex creatures may be the first to go extinct. Depending on your point of view, does increased specialization imply improvement or loss of adaptive capacity? In fact does life and specialization run contrary to the laws of thermodynamics. The second law predicts disorganization.
A horizontal continuum for example could be applied to the time line of species differentiation. Here is a visual representation of a relationship between and among animal adaptability and humidity during the recent 20,000-year history of the area. I picked humidity because, as you could see in our previous presentations, desertification was the most prominent aspect of the environments we explored.

X-Axis (Time): Spans from \(20,000\) years ago (Last Glacial Maximum) to the present day.
Y-Axis (Animal Adaptability): Represents the biological versatility and survival threshold of the regional fauna.
Z-Axis (Relative Humidity / Moisture): Represents the effective regional moisture, tracking the African Humid Period (approx. \(15,000\) to \(5,000\) years ago) and the subsequent Holocene aridification
Please see the extensive discussion of this in the following posting titled Exploring Animal Adaptability in Southeast Africa.
The 20,000-Year Timeline
- 20,000 to 15,000 Years Ago (Last Glacial Maximum):
- 15,000 to 5,000 Years Ago (African Humid Period):
- Z (Humidity): High. Monsoon rains expanded into the southern tropics, creating vast, resource-rich savannas and lakes (such as those in the Lake Malawi basin).
- Y (Adaptability): High. The lush, stable environment allowed for an expansion of both generalist and highly specialized animal species. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
- 5,000 Years Ago to Present Day (Progressive Aridification):
- Z (Humidity): Decreasing. Regional humidity dropped significantly, causing a return to arid or semi-arid conditions.
- Y (Adaptability): Bifurcating. Highly specialized taxa (niche foragers) faced extinction, while the surviving fauna demonstrated exceptional, evolutionarily “winnowed” adaptability. [1, 2]
Theory of SPECIALIZED extinction
Specialized Extinction is progressive reduction of life forms. It is the unspecified opposite of Darwin’s theory. Please recall that Darwin’s work of the mid 1800s predated the current concepts of ecology, genetics, statistics, modern scientific method, advances in understanding of natural history, microbiology, plate tectonics, climate change, extraterrestrial incidents, human behavior, etc.
We are experiencing the reverse of the origin of the species. This is the loss of the species variations. Species vary in response to environmental pressure. Without necessity there is no invention. With environmental change only the adaptable will survive.
MASS EXTINCTIONS
During the ice age animals located in water compromised areas or in cold climates faced environmental pressure. Many were not capable of adapting with sufficient rapidity to the changes. The advancing cold wall of ice combined with the massive dust storms which ripped across the deserts of the planes starved, froze or buried millions as they struggled to compete for diminishing food and water. These climatic events resulted in loss of thousands of species, of fauna and flora of the northern continental masses.
This process of extermination was exaggerated by bottleneck effect and genetic drift.


Fig 1 and Fig 2 are two variations on population behavior that limit the genetic pool of diversified genomes.
In Fig. 1 This can happen when the genetic pool is insufficient to maintain variance. The largest constituent group are light and dark green. If the orange portion dies and the purple portion does not invade, then the survivors can only reproduce mixed green progeny.
In Fig. 2 In the biologic bottleneck only a few members of the population escape. In this case the green did not pass the bottleneck. Those that did act are founders of a new community with a more exclusive population. Since only one yellow member passed the bottleneck it represents an extinction effect unless it can hybridize with the blue members. If not it will die thus ending that part of the population. Hybridization may result in a recovery of the population that will not be exclusively blue. Alternatively, with recessive traits the population will recover with a Mendelian result.
The well known traps are outlined below. I suggest that the study of these traps may challenge the initial concepts theorized by Darwin.
TRAPS DEFINED
By specialization animal abilities to avoid these traps are disadvantaged.
Specialization Trap is where the animals of a species undergoes physical evolution to match their environment. This results in highly efficient but physically fragile animals who cannot cope with the changes in their environment that occur faster than they can adapt. This includes many species and may be a natural process. Loss of one non-adapting species makes room for another. This is consistent with Darwinian “Natural Selection”.
Genetic Bottleneck Trap results in reduced adaptability. When the population reaches a point of limited genetic variation there is insufficient capacity to adapt to environmental changes, such as climate change or new diseases.
Genetic Drift Trap results in lack of genetic diversity.
Declining Prey Base Trap is a broad based result of all the regional population of mutually entangled species with an extremely low general DNA variance.
Habitat Fragmentation Trap prevents the massive, free-roaming across territories. Without corridors, species cannot migrate to compatible environments. Conversely, species variants can immigrate into territories thereby promoting hybridization.
Daylight Hunting Trap Prevents animals from night hunting while hot, dry daytime conditions become intolerable
Human-Wildlife Conflict. Genocidal hunting, trapping and habitat destruction by farming and mining at industrial scale combine to make the ultimate trap.
CHEETAH
Cheetah are likely a distinct, naturally evolved species (Acinonyx jubatus) belonging to the small-cat lineage (Felinae). Their closest living relatives are the puma (mountain lion) and the jaguarundi. They cannot be naturally hybridized with other members of the Felinea because they are just too different. They split from the rest of the cat family tree millions of years ago and are the sole members of their own unique genus, Acinonyx.
- They are not related to the Pantherinae (Lions, which started in Africa)
- Cheetah existed secondary to late Pleistocene bottleneck extinctions 100K to 12K years ago.
Cheetahs are believed to have survived the two ice age catastrophic population bottlenecks that nearly drove the species to extinction. [1, 2] The root causes of cheetah’s problems were the two historic climatic bottlenecks plus their great speed. They were able to quickly run ahead of their competitors and ranged widely looking for prey. They out ran their competitors and extended beyond their base population. As small groups continuously separated from their peers they formed new island clusters. These founder effect groups were cut off from hybridization and experienced genetic drift. In summary:
- They are not related to the Pantherinae (Lions, which started in Africa)
- Cheetah existed secondary to late Pleistocene bottleneck extinctions 100K to 12K years ago.
- Cheetah developed in the Asia/Americas and are related to domestic cats.
- Extremely inbred with depressed dominant traits.
- They are all near identical clones: Completely depleted of variation in their genomes
- They are experiencing founder effect. Africa is their CULMINATING POINT
LION
As a member of the big cat family these animals were born and bred in Africa. Modern lions diverged and began to leave its earliest fossilized footprints in East Africa around 2 to 3 million years ago. Through a combination of geographic refugia, extreme dietary flexibility, and evolutionary teamwork the lions thrived in the dry, ice free planes of Africa.
Cheetah and Lion – SUBJECTED TO time, relative humidity and LEVEL of adaptability
Over the last 20,000 years in Southeast Africa, climate shifts drastically altered humidity and ecosystems. The region swung between severe arid phases (like the Last Glacial Maximum) and the highly humid African Humid Period. In that period animal adaptability peaked. Generalist species thrived by adjusting to habitats, while specialists faced selective extinction. [1, 2, 3, 4] Some mammalian species failed to track their preferred climates over the last several thousand years. The failure to either migrate or adapt quickly may be their obstacle to survive. There is a significant time lag between climate change and species’ responses. These two cats were able to survive. The African Saber-toothed Cats, Scimitar Cats, Eastern Koppard and the Giant Cheetahs did not make it through the last 50,000 to 10,000 years.
Below is a four-column table of paleoclimatic and evolutionary timeline outlining the historical shifts:[1, 2]
| Time (Years Ago) [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11] | Relative Humidity (Z-Axis) | Animal Adaptability & Response (Y-Axis) | Environmental Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20,000 – 15,000 | Very Low(Dry / Arid) | High (Specialist Die-off / Generalist Shift) | Last Glacial Maximum. Equatorial lakes dried, forcing animals to adapt to sparse resources. |
| 15,000 – 11,500 | Increasing(Transition) | Moderate to High (Adaptive radiation) | Deglaciation. Climate instability introduced genetic variance and rapid adaptation (“variability selection”). |
| 11,500 – 5,000 | Very High(Wet / Humid) | High (Biodiversity Boom) | African Humid Period. Savannas expanded, and water-reliant generalist species thrived and spread. |
| 5,000 – 2,000 | Decreasing(Drying Trend) | High (Behavioral Adaptability) | Monsoons weakened, leading to progressive desertification and forcing animals/humans into complex, mixed-habitat strategies. |
| 2,000 – Present | Moderate / Variable | High | Modern climate regimes. Continuous micro-adaptations are documented, though global warming increasingly tests limits. |
This is the scenario of failure to survive, the theory should be called “THE THEORY of SPECIALIZED EXTINCTION” The tenants of this are
- Reproduction with wide ranging genetic adaptability
- Environmental change
- Differential reproduction based on past environments
- Extinction by environmental change
THE EFFECTS OF THIS ON PEOPLE TODAY
A very small hominoid population (likely Homo heidelbergensis or Homo erectus) expanded before 900,000-800,000 years ago. It underwent a massive glacial bottleneck which lasted for 100,000 years. The population was reduced to ~1200 individuals. This lengthy event killed off so much of the population that it irreversibly reduced the genetic diversity of the species. The effects of that have persisted until today. Even though chimpanzees and gorillas might look similar to us, they have many more times the genetic diversity within their species than humans.
CONCLUSION:
We can conclude that developing survival strength through unique specialization may be a death trap. To do this we followed cheetahs and lions as they adapt and survived through the last 20,000 years. There was an entire eco system which followed the same path. We should pay more attention to the generalists. Survival by adaptation to environmental change is more advantageous than specialization. Ability to change our environment may be our only survival option.
In our next posting (Exploring Animal Adaptability in Southeast Africa) we will try to project the future of the fauna for the next 50 years. See you there !
If you wish to receive notifications please enter your email address and click on SUBSCRIBE
If you wish to comment on this posting please use the form below>
REFERENCES
uhttps://www.science.org/content/article/carnivorous-ballet-helps-cheetahs-coexist-lions
uhttps://www.wildlifenomads.com/blog/cheetah-facts/
uhttp://www.macroevolution.net/natural-selection.html
uhttps://evolution.berkeley.edu/evo-news/will-evolution-doom-the-cheetah/
uhttps://evolution.berkeley.edu/triggering-adaptive-radiation/
uhttps://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolution-101/macroevolution/
# Cheetah #lions #traps #genetic drift #bottleneck #adaptability #evolution #environment #founder effect #survival
























































































































































Please help to improve the site. Leave a comment