MacMe

Speaking of models, check this one out. This is the Space Shuttle Independence, a life size replica. Not sure where it was being transported

I watched a show that talked about a Russian experiment at attaching a glider to a light tank, and towing it behind a large plane for rapid deployment nearly anywhere. The tank then just need to unhook the glider to be battle ready. I recall only one attempt was made. The glider-tank was detached early because the drag was so great it threatened the plane. The tank driver survived the rough glider landing. I don't remember why it what it was scraped in favor of

such a quotable movie, lol

"tis only a model"

needlefish or pipefish. I 'think' these are related to seahorses

When you have to sing but your heart isn't into it.

Really? Life is so complicated and simple, robust and delicate. Did they say how those areas respond to replication or transcription? I guess the proteins will need to be removed or maybe they don't get in the way of polymerase or helicase. Did they how such sites are chosen?

My apologies too, I thought those were two different thoughts For favorable: The article about the Reddish Egret morph hunting. The white morph allows the species a broader foraging range. I would assume other species, such as house cats, will exhibit varying hunting success and strategies due to coat color/pattern. The article listing different types of polymorphism implied to me that the variety (such as human blood type) will help prevent a species wide disaster in case one morph is no longer successful (I agree with you 'unsuccessful' is a more appropriate word than 'unnecessary'). In my moth example, the dark morph kept the species from going extinct in the industrial age, and again with the white morph when the air cleaned up. Sexual dimorphism is another example found all over the world: one gender larger, or more colorful, or drab, etc. than the other. Unfavorable: the morph leads to less success, like with the white alligator. If the trait is completely removed and the environment changes enough to now favor that missing trait, that species essentially lost one of its tools. Getting it back may take a very long time. However, I am curious to postulate potential scenarios where a white gator would have better success. It's possible that these benefits are indirect, happy little accidents, so to speak, only available because having those traits did not scientifically reduce the owner's reproductive success rate. Although, I wouldn't discount 'unnecessary' completely, especially when comparing vestigial organs with organs that are completely absent. One example would be those blind and transparent cave salamanders. Eyes and skin tone are quite unnecessary in those caves. To my knowledge, having them wouldn't not impact their success. The unnecessary was removed to free up energy and resources.

@Charlie Spencer please expound on why you disagree. You can't just dangle an carrot and walk away! Ma Nature can put some weird things in the mix but she also is good and getting rid of unnecessary things. A rare polymorphic trait lingers because the organism with the gene is successful enough to pass it on to the next generation. Either the trait helps in some way, or it isn't 'bad' enough to be fully removed

What I gather from everyone's contribution is polymorphism is a trait that helps the success of the species. 1) It keeps the species from dying out from a slow or sudden change in their niche, because the other morph may be better in this new situation. The morph ratio may shift but the species will survive. An example of this are those white moths in the UK that were no longer camouflaged when the soot from the coal factories turned the white-trunked trees grey. The population shifted to the grey morph moths. Then, when environmental laws were placed and the trees became white again, the grey morph wasn't cutting it anymore and the moth population shifted back to white. 2) It helps the species gain the maximum population range. When the environment shifts from one type to another it may favor the other morph extending the range of suitable habitat. It makes me wonder which niche white alligators fill and if there was ever a time where that morph was the more successful. 3) It makes me wonder about species without apparent polymorphism. However, polymorphism also effects traits that aren't readily noticeable. So, a species with only one color morph may not be as vulnerable to changes as it may seem. With this said, it sounds like the more morphs the better. I assume this isn't true, that there is a detrimental effect with having multiple morphs that get compounded the more a species has. I wonder what the 'happy medium' is and if all stable species is at this value. 4) These below questions merit further exploration Have any of you come to any other conclusions?

That was it. Thanks @xpoetmarcrand @lonestranger

Good eye! I think I watched this video but totally missed it. He goes right past both those menu options. I'll check them out next chance I get.

This abstract is very interesting. The dark-plumaged birds foraging in shallow water (1-5cm) tend to use active tactics. Allaboutbirds describes Reddish Egrets as active hunters, so that seems to fit. The abstract also says the white morphs spent more time in intermediate depths (5-10cm) then their reddish counterparts while actively foraging. I didn't know white was a better color for deeper water. Its likely this trend fits to other white shorebirds. Allaboutbirds' description of Snowy Egrets sound like it use active tactics while its description of the Great Egret sounds more passive. Now it makes me think about Great Blue Herons. How deep do they forage? If they follow this hypothesis, they would stay fairly shallow, despite their long legs.

That is a good suggestion about leaving a copy of the last photo. I give that a go next time. I have not noticed something about this in the manual and it isn't an easily searched topic online. I think its just too small a thing. I figured this was the kind of thing someone learns or finds out as they get familiar with the object which is why I put it in the forum. Still waiting for dpreview moderators to approve my post.

Going back to the original question, being white probably doesn't affect sexual preference, and if it does, it is selected for. But hunting success and predator avoidance could still have significant effects. Could we include temperature regulation as well? Both of these quoted questions are very interesting

Another though about this is animals often make themselves easier prey to show how fit they are. Bright and obvious coloring, loud or overt behavior, and ornate features that inhibit motion are some examples

I suppose albino individuals would have similar results, but albinoism is more than just being white. I don't think the reddish egret's white morph is albinoism. I did a quick check on all-white bird chicks, American White Pelican, and Snowy and Great Egrets, and those all have white chicks. White Ibis juveniles are not mostly white. Gator hatchlings after leaving mom have more time to spend getting to adulthood, whereas all-white bird chicks have a relatively shorter time. This may allow all white bird chick to exist. Anyone know of an all, or mostly-white adult bird with non-white chicks? How long does it take these to reach adulthood?

Good point. Though there are many all white bird species and they seem to do well. The differenece would be that those all white species are adapted to being all white, where as the Reddish Egret White Morph is not. Being white probably makes it harder to get food as well. Perhaps the strategies they use in their Reddish morph does not translate as well to the white morph

Thanks for the suggestion, I posted this question over to there

Earlier today I posted on the ID forum a bird with a white morph and it got me thinking and wanting to know your thoughts on the topic. For the sake of the argument I'll refer to the Reddish Egret and its white morph since that was the animal that started these thoughts. I am assuming the white morph individual is genetically hardwired this way and will always display this phenotype. Since coloration is so important to birds, how does being white impact their mating success? I would assume the white morph is selected against, meaning they simply don't attract mates, or perhaps an underlining condition that comes with this coloration that inhibits or reduces reproductive success. Another way I was thinking about this is maybe both Reddish Egret phenotypes have no issue pairing with each other. If so, do they have issues with cross breeding? To my human eyes, white morphs look similar enough to Great Egrets and to Snowy Egrets to merit this idea. I am also assuming the white morph is a homozygous trait, meaning it comes from both parents. If either parent supplies the red phenotype then the offspring will be red as well. Anyone know more about this? What color are the chicks from two white morph parents? What is the reproductive success of the white morphs. How successful are white morphs at catching food and avoiding predators? Are these questions moot in reference to this species?

This bird had me scratching my head because it looks like a Snowy and a Great Egret, but not quite either. Looking around, could it be an immature Reddish Egret white morph? Unfortunately, the sun was low, making a lot of contrast. Photos taken 12/20/2021, Corpus Christi, TX

Ah, the seasonal beard. Gotta stay warm!

That is probably the case most of the time. I can only imagine all the animals I walked past without even knowing because they stayed still

I have a Nikon B600. When I photograph it automatically assigns a name to the picture. Something like DSC_0139 or DSCN2948. Every time I take a picture, the number value goes up by one, even if I turn the camera off or remove the files off the memory card. So the naming doesn't repeat until it reaches the highest value. Now, I recently got a Nikon D5600. It does a similar thing except it resets the count every time I turn it off. I can't figure out how to stop it doing this. I like to dump my photos into a temporary file so I can sift through them in my own time, but I can't do this with this D5600 because if I go birding with this temporary folder still holding pictures, I'll end up with two files with the same name, which my computer doesn't like. If anyone knows how to make my D5600 more like my B600 in this regard I would be most interested