Which came first, the chicken or the egg? This age-old question has puzzled scientists, philosophers, and ordinary people for centuries. The paradox stems from the fact that chickens come from eggs, but eggs are laid by chickens. So, which one appeared first in the evolutionary timeline? To unravel this mystery, we need to turn to the theory of evolution. According to Charles Darwin's theory, species gradually evolve through natural selection over long periods of time. This means that gradual changes occur in populations over generations, leading to the formation of new species. In the case of chickens and eggs, we can assume that the ancestors of chickens gradually transformed into a different species through small genetic variations.
Funnily enough, bacon and eggs for breakfast can all be traced back to the founding father of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud. He just really has a way of inserting himself in American culture. His nephew, Edward Bernays, inspired by his uncle's work was a founder of propaganda and public relations and is credited with the introduction of bacon and eggs into the American breakfast.
Jungle birds were domesticated for egg production in India by 3200 BC, and it is thought that Ancient Egypt and Ancient China were the first societies to domesticate hens. At some point during the domestication process, the last ancestor of modern chickens would have laid an egg containing an embryo with enough genetic differences to make it distinct from its parent species.
In the case of chickens and eggs, we can assume that the ancestors of chickens gradually transformed into a different species through small genetic variations. This gradual change would have taken place over numerous generations, with each slight modification making the offspring slightly different from their parents. At some point, these genetic alterations would have accumulated to the extent that a new species was formed - the chicken.
Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Eggs come from chickens and chickens come from eggs: that’s the basis of this ancient riddle. But eggs – which are just female sex cells – evolved more than a billion years ago, whereas chickens have been around for just 10,000 years. So the riddle is easily solved…or is it?
Taken at face value, there is no doubt that the egg came before the chicken. We tend to think of eggs as the shelled orbs laid by birds from which their chicks hatch – unless we eat them first. But all sexually reproducing species make eggs (the specialised female sex cells). That’s 99.99 per cent of all eukaryotic life – meaning organisms that have cells with a nucleus, so all animals and plants, and everything but the simplest life forms.
We don’t know for sure when sex evolved but it could have been as much as 2 billion years ago, and certainly more than 1 billion. Even the specialised sort of eggs laid by birds, with their tough outer membrane, evolved more than 300 million years ago.
As for chickens, they came into being much later. They are domesticated animals, so evolved as the result of humans purposefully selecting the least aggressive wild birds and letting them breed. This seems to have happened in several places independently, starting around 10,000 years ago.
The wild ancestor of chickens is generally agreed to be a tropical bird still living in the forests of Southeast Asia called the red junglefowl – with other junglefowl species possibly adding to the genetic mix. From these origins, humans have carried chickens around the world over the past two millennia or more.
So, eggs dramatically predate chickens. But to be fair to the spirit of the riddle, we should also consider whether a chicken’s egg predates a chicken. As humans consistently chose the tamest red junglefowls and bred them together, the genetic makeup of the resulting birds will have shifted. At some stage during this domestication process the red junglefowl (Gallus gallus) evolved into a new subspecies, Gallus gallus domesticus, AKA the chicken.
In practice, it is impossible to pinpoint the moment when this happened. But in theory, at some point two junglefowl bred and their offspring was genetically different enough from the species of its parents to be classified as a chicken. This chicken would have developed within a junglefowl egg and only produced the very first chicken’s egg on reaching maturity. Looked at this way, the chicken came first.
Taken at face value, there is no doubt that the egg came before the chicken. We tend to think of eggs as the shelled orbs laid by birds from which their chicks hatch – unless we eat them first. But all sexually reproducing species make eggs (the specialised female sex cells). That’s 99.99 per cent of all eukaryotic life – meaning organisms that have cells with a nucleus, so all animals and plants, and everything but the simplest life forms.
So, in this context, the egg containing the first chicken must have come first. However, this does not provide a completely satisfactory answer to the question. If we go back in time to the very first "chicken" ancestor, there is a possibility that its offspring may have been slightly different from itself due to those small genetic variations. Therefore, it is not possible to pinpoint the exact moment when a non-chicken produced the first chicken egg. Ultimately, the question of which came first, the chicken or the egg, is a philosophical one that may not have a definitive answer. It is a fascinating topic that invites us to ponder the intricacies of evolutionary processes and the mysteries of the natural world..
Reviews for "Whtch came first: dinosaurs or humans?"
1. Emily - 2/5 - I was really disappointed in "Which Came First". The plot was confusing and the characters were bland and uninteresting. I found myself struggling to finish the book and didn't feel any connection to the story or its outcome. The writing style was also not my cup of tea, with overly descriptive passages that did not add anything to the overall narrative. I've read other books by this author that I enjoyed, but this one just fell flat for me.
2. John - 1/5 - I regret wasting my time reading "Which Came First". The story lacked depth and failed to engage me from the beginning. The characters were poorly developed and their actions were often illogical and nonsensical. I found myself constantly questioning the author's choices and couldn't suspend my disbelief. The ending was also unsatisfying and left me with more questions than answers. Overall, a forgettable and tedious read.
3. Sarah - 2/5 - I was expecting so much more from "Which Came First", but unfortunately, it did not live up to the hype. The writing felt disjointed and lacked cohesion, making it difficult to follow the storyline. The pacing was off, with slow and tedious moments interspersed with rushed and confusing ones. I was left feeling underwhelmed and frustrated at the wasted potential of this book. The concept had promise, but the execution fell short for me.
4. Ryan - 3/5 - "Which Came First" had an intriguing premise, but it never quite reached its full potential. The characters were underdeveloped and lacked depth, making it difficult to connect with their experiences. The plot itself had moments of excitement, but they were overshadowed by long periods of stagnation. While I appreciated the author's attempt at a unique and thought-provoking story, it missed the mark for me. Overall, a decent read, but not one that I would highly recommend.