ExtinctZoo - When Evolution Made The Same Animal Twice

Episode Date: March 8, 2025

If you take a look through time you will come to the realization that we are all the same, but different... let me explain.

You're great at protecting your data, but lots of places could still expose you to identity theft. I thought it was safe. If that happens, LifeLock gives you a U.S.-based restoration agent who will stick by your side from start to finish. Phone calls, filing documentation, preparing insurance claims, your agent handles it all. In fact, we're so confident restoration is guaranteed. Pour your money back. Isn't it nice to have someone like that on your side? Save up to 40% your first year at LifeLock.com slash Spotify.

Terms apply. You said this place was steps from the water. We just haven't found the steps yet. How much did we save? Enough. Enough to get lost. Or you could book a stay with Hilton. Welcome to your oceanfront room.

Just steps from the water. The Hilton sale is on now. Book on Hilton.com or the Hilton app and save up to 20% to get the stay you expected. When you want savings, not surprises. It matters where you stay. Hilton, for the stay. You have most likely heard of this saying,

Work smarter, not harder. And there is no more vocal advocate for this than nature itself. And this is obvious when you take a peak in evolution, as animals typically evolved become more and more effective for their chosen environment. And one of the most interesting cases of this is seen in convergent evolution,

which simply put, signifies the idea, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But as more specifically defined by, unrelated animals evolving the same or similar features independently. Like how bats and whales both possess echolocation, or the fact that many wildly different groups of animals possess eyes, like insects versus mammals. And when you really take a good look at animals, you'll notice that most do have shared similarities with others. But it's only once in a blue moon that two unrelated creatures end up evolving so similarly that they basically look like almost exact copies of one another.

Take legless lizards and snakes, for example, who could basically pass for twins, but haven't shared a common understanding. ancestor for over 100 million years, which is longer than the time between humans and cats, and yet we look very different. And this phenomena is by no means of modern trend, extending well into the past, too, and thus leading to the odd case of a few modern animals looking a lot like those of prehistory, and in some ways giving us about the closest thing we have to time travel. One of the most uncanny cases of this actually involves two icons, both from the past and present, Ictheosaurs and dolphins. While many marine animals have evolved similar body plans to cut down on drag,

dolphins and ichthyosaurs took it to the extreme, so much so that ichthyosaurs are commonly referred to as the Dolphins of the Mesozoic, despite being reptilian. And the two shared over 20 odd features, which in conjunction to general body shape, included finger bones, elongated front skulls, short necks, live births, smooth skin, in likely similar coloring, with their top sides being darker while the bottom was lighter.

But perhaps the oddest of all is that recent evidence implies that ichthosaurs also had a trait that is rarely seen in reptiles or even marine animals overall, but is very common in marine mammals, including dolphins, and that is blubber, which serves to help provide insulation and protection in colder waters. Additionally, their senses might have been more alike than first thought, as both had powerful eyes for low light and increased pressure environments, and ears that were extremely dense and massive, providing excellent hearing. The amount of likeness further extended to their lifestyles, because though Ictheasors did have diverse diets depending on their size,

most still stuck to fish, cephalopods, and crustaceans, so nearly identical to that of a dolphin's menu. And it's this similar lifestyle that may have pushed both to end up evolving in very similar ways, just millions and millions of years apart. With the ichthosaurs, having first appeared during the early Triassic and dying 90 million years ago. And naturally, because there were so many ichthosaurus species throughout the 150 million years of its existence, not all of them ended up being as identical to dolphins as the next. But there was one group that really took the cake, and that was the ophthalmosauridae,

who sometimes had such similar design and size to dolphins that underwater, you might not have been able to notice that it was actually a marine reptile. Yet somehow their resemblance to each other still does not compare to an even older pairing, which starts with this. What you're looking at is for all sense and purposes, a crocodile, or at least a crocodilian, or so you'd think. Because in reality, it isn't. Rather, it is a phytosaur, an extreme mimic, that evolved roughly 196 million years

before true crocodiles and belonged to the arc of sauomorphic clade, which contains all reptiles more closely related to archosaurs, like dinosaurs and crocodiles, than to lapidosaurs, aka lizards, snakes, and tuataras. And yes, I did say crocodiles there, but the two are actually very unrelated, a bit like how humans are mammals, but very distantly related to say marsupials. And even groups like plant-eating aotosaurus, or the bipedal chuvosaurus, are more closely related to crocs than the phytosaurus, which makes it all the weirder that phytosaurs are pretty much the exact copies of crocodiles,

possessing armored bodies, long snouts, cone-shaped teeth, low legs, and specialized tails. It's believed that they also lived out a semi-aquatic lifestyle, showing that the design of a crock works wonder in many situations no matter the time. And the two's sheer likeness is one argument for why aliens might not be really all that different from life on Earth, assuming they live in similar environments, that is. Because if something works in one place, it'll probably work in another. And these days, researchers say that the differences between phytosaurs and crocs were only minor, with most contrasting features not even being external,

as phytosaurs had slightly more primitive ankle bones, denser and more extensive armor, and a lack of a secondary palate, which lets Crocs breathe even with water in their mouths. Although it is possible that they actually had fleshy pallets that just did not fossilize. And on the outside, the biggest difference between the two was that phytosaurs had nostrils near or above the level of their eyes, So in other words, basically no difference at all. And this example is perhaps the most extreme case of convergent evolution regarding Crocs,

but surprisingly, it's not the only one, with a lesser but more perplexing case, coming from a whale of all things. And actually, one of the first whales, the Ambulacetus. Yes, it may be hard to believe, but this is in fact a cetacean, having lived some 47 million years ago and was amphibious, not aquatic. It represented a transitional point in whale evolution, and was in some ways closer to Crocs than its eventual descendants, with researchers believing it behaved a lot like modern crocodiles, waiting close to the water's surface in order to ambush large animals, using strong, large jaws to drown or thrash prey into pieces.

Furthermore, like Crocs, its eyes were situated on the top of its head, allowing it to peak above water, and it had a nasal cavity with bony walls that helped to keep its airways open while killing prey, much like a crock. I mean honestly, minus the fur and some other differences, this was essentially the mammal's version of a crock. And funnily enough, in another twinsy situation, Crocs also then had their own whale, the stomatosucas. Now this is an extinct crocodile from the late Cretaceous, who actually lived alongside the Spinosaurus, but unsurprisingly had a pretty different life, and one quite different from most crocs too, considering that it possessed a massive, extremely stretchy throat pouch that allowed it to scoop up and engulf fish and sharks in one swoop,

kind of similar to how certain baleen whales and pelicans, for that matter, feed today. With the biggest difference being that instead of having baleen or a toothless beak, the stomatosuchus had many tiny teeth that interlocked when biting down, forming a biological zipper of sorts, and ensuring that any animal inside its mouth was doomed. And its size also drew from whales, it seems, as adults were regularly reached 10 meters or 33 feet long, making it one of the biggest animals you could find in the water at the time. But sadly, as far as we know, this bizarre creature did not stick around for long, and thus ensuring that whale crocs did not make it to today. Now, while it might seem that water was

the place where everyone was copying each other, it definitely happened on land too, and even occur between dinosaurs and mammals, perhaps best demonstrated by Enkylosors and Armadillos. At first you may not see it, but when you really compare the two, you'll notice that it's strange how similar they are, given their huge difference in time and relation. Yet both have ended up with near full-bodied armor designed to protect against external threats. And if we cheat a little and include extinct armadillos, the similarity becomes quite hard to unsee. As one for for gonadons, the glyptodons could literally pass for incalosaurs, with a couple growing to extremely large sizes, actually outsizing small cars and possessing tail weapons

akin to what was actually seen in a few incalosaurs, notably the incalosaurus. And the armadillo, which achieved this the most, was arguably the Doe Dicarus, which lived in South America during the Pleistocene and Holocene, and was equipped with a huge spiked tail that could be used like a wrecking ball to pulverized bone. And this design worked for them for a surprisingly long time, with them having survived up until humans reached South America, which is around when they went extinct. And simultaneously, other mammals have also ironically, convergingly evolved to be similar to anchylosaurs, beyond just the armadillos, like the Pangolans, for example, a strange order of mammals that evolved large protective keratinous scales

that overlay across their entire bodies, giving some resemblance to certain anchylosaurs who had extensive armor but lack tail clubs. And this just really goes to show that when danger exists, sometimes it's a good idea to just double down on defense and not bother with the rest. But the same can also be said about offense, where in the case of herbivores, evolution has shown time and time again that a charge and ask questions later kind of build is a lot of the times the best way to go, nicely exemplified by elephants and an animal so old that mammals didn't even exist when it was alive. The Placerius.

This was an extinct Dicinodont that hailed from Triassic North America around 230 million years ago and had two prominent tusks just like elephants. And while many others in his family did also have tusks, what was unique about the Placerius was that they were much longer in general, pointed downwards, and were used in almost the exact same way that elephants used theirs, for digging, display, and combat, if needed. And again as seen in elephants, Placerius also demonstrated sexual dimorphism with its tusks size, with males often having longer more visible ones while they were reduced in females. Additionally, they, or rather elephants, followed in their footwork.

steps because while Plycerius wasn't nearly as big as an elephant, with matured individuals only weighing about 1.1 tons, it still made them the largest herbivores of their times, just like how proboscideans are today. But what's funny is that this size is actually more similar to a hippos weight, with whom researchers also think it shares convergent traits. So it was kind of like a strange elephant hippo hybrid, and it may have spent much of its life slinking around in shallow waters and along banks, eating vegetation, and sharing a few hippo-like features, including a powerful neck, strong legs, and a barrel-shaped body. This makes it all the more coincidental that some prehistoric elephants also looked a little bit

like hippos too, such as the platy belladon, despite hippos being more closely related to whales than their trunked contemporaries. Ambition comes in all shapes and sizes. At First Citizens Bank, we roll with your goals because we're built for what you're building. Fit for your ambition for Citizens Bank. It all. Pay off your home. Travel for life. Drive a Ferrari. In celebration of the world premiere of the Monopoly Big Board Buckslot machine by Aristocrat Gaming, Yamava Resort and Casino at San Manuel is giving one person a $1.6 million dream package. The biggest prize in Yamava's history. Club Serrano

members can earn daily instant prizes and secure a spot in the finale May 29th. Don't pass go and own it all. Only at Yamava, celebrating its 40th anniversary. You win? Details at yamava.com must be 21-20. Please gamble responsibly. Monopoly is a trademark of Hasbro. Hasbro is not a sponsor of this promotion. Now another instance that very much proves that charging just works is actually seen in a neighbor of hippos and elephants, the rhinoceros. These guys first evolved in Asia before spreading out across much of the world, partially thanks to them getting versatile-centered horns that jut upwards and allow them to dish out some pretty immense damage, especially when coupled with their enormous size. And unsurprisingly, we see throughout history quite a few animals developed this design as well,

specifically being large and having upward tusks, like seratopsids, whose horns were also centered and were used as a means of deterrence, defense, and display. Yet the weirdest similarity with rhinos didn't come from dinosaurs, but another mammal, the trigodon. What's really strange about this creature is that not only did it have a short frontal horn on the top of its head, but it was also highly rhino-shaped, with the two sharing very similar body structures and proportions. So much so, in fact, that before a horn was even discovered, just based on its skeletal structure alone, some paleontologists believed that the trigidon was actually a species of rhino. However, interestingly enough, not only was it not a rhino, but it also lived where rhinos never actually appeared, South America,

meaning that in a totally rhinolist place, this creature evolved to be nearly identical, and at the same time that rhinos were already alive, as it evolved only some 11 million years ago or so, and persisted to just about 4 million years ago. In like the first of the world, The rhinos, it is presumed to have used the horn in a very similar way. Although it did live in a quite different environment that was both extremely wet and littered with rivers and lakes, as it inhabited a now no longer existing mega wetland. Funnily enough, while its closest living relatives happens to be a group that includes rhinos, the two are ultimately not that related, as after all, the group to which it belongs to,

the no-ungulata, is literally an extinct order, so taxonomically, quite out there. But that being said, Notoangulata did happen to exist for over 60 million years, and as such there have been over 150 genera belonging to this group. So it may not be surprising that rhinos are not the only animals they've come to look like, with a more striking example being rabbits, as seen with the Pachirucos. It's honestly unbelievable that this Eocene-dated animal was not a rabbit, and yet it surely was a nooangulata, just like the trigodon, meaning it was closer to zebras than her hopping friends,

although its skeletal structure does suggest that it could hop if it wanted to. And not only that, but it essentially matched a rabbit in every way, having a short tail, long hind feet, rabbit-like teeth, and of course the iconic long white ears. With the only major difference being that the Pachirucos was perhaps nocturnal, or so researchers believe based off its large eyes. Now them being in almost one-for-one copy is likely the result of its lifestyle, and the fact that it lived in very similar environments to rabbits.

Which again really shows how if something works, you can expect it to manifest again and again in nature. I mean, just look at the marsupials, who are also known to mimic placental mammals, despite their last common ancestor being over 140 million years ago. Even the most iconic extinct marsupial, the thylacine, was guilty of this, bearing a striking resemblance to canines, especially wolves and dingoes,

with which it shared a very similar skull that to most people, are not able to distinguish between them. The teeth and body were also very similar, and from a general anatomical sense, the thalocene is much closer to canines than other Australian marsupials, even though genetically it's way closer to a wombat or kangaroo than any canad,

and evolved this appearance completely independently, with the last ancestor between it and canids being dated all the way to the Jurassic. The sheer coincidence of this convergent evolution is further emphasized when you consider that we ourselves are more related to a dingo than it is to a thylacine. And researchers believe that, like in many cases, this odd situation is a result of similar environmental pressures. They made a candid-like body plan the best choice.

And another mind-boggler involves one of the most distinct animals out there. Turtles. Their shape and carapaces make them extremely unique. But alas, even their individuality hasn't stopped nature from making turtle-like creatures that don't have anything to do with them. the placodons. This was an extinct order of marine reptiles that existed throughout the middle and late Triassic, and remembers of the superorder, the Sarapteridia, which by the way includes pleasosaurs and nithosaurs. Now, some of the placodons did not look much like turtles, but others, they sure did, especially the Hennodis, which really did look like some proto-turtle, having a very similar shell that was composed of a plasterine on the bottom and a carapace on top

that also took up its midsection, leaving just their head and very behind sticking out, with a big distinguishing trait in its shell, being that it was more bony than that of a turtle. But like for turtles, those shells would have offered placodons a high level of protection, which was much needed, as in those times the waters of Earth were home to some creepy and dangerous aquatic animals. And fascinatingly, the placodons were not the only members of the Sarup Tarigian to convergingly evolved traits shared with turtles, as the same situation was seen as certain Saras Faraday, another family which evolved extremely turtle-like shells and general body shapes, despite not being the evolutionary branch that gave way to turtles.

Thus, if they were the placodons had not gone extinct, though we might have had multiple turtle-like animals roaming the world, which I know Nemo would have loved. And another very unique-looking creature that did not escape convergent evolution, are stingrays, who had a look-alike that lived hundreds and millions of years before they emerged. The Renonids, a bizarre order of placoderms that were in no way related to what would one day become stingrays. In fact, because they lived some 400 million years ago and went extinct not so long after, they never even got to see their twin, who evolved during the Cretaceous hundreds of millions of years later.

But like the stingrays we know, renonids were pancake-shaped bottom-dwelling creatures that had eyes on the top of their heads, that allowed them to look up while relaxing on the seafloor. With their diets all being quite similar as well. Additionally, they two add wings, so you could say, like rays do. And the only way you could really tell one wasn't a stingray was by touching it, as they were scaly and slightly armored, whereas stingrays are of course smooth, in a sandpaper texture-like way. You also would not have needed to watch out around these guys,

as they did not reach the same sizes that rays do, and they lacked the stinger at the end of their tails, rendering them quite harmless to larger creatures. But this did not stop them from spreading far and wide. and for a short time frame, they could be found all across the world. And while not as Ray-like as the Renanids, you did also have Eugalia Spitoforms too, which happened to live at the same time with the Runonids, despite not even belonging to the same order. These guys in general had body plans a bit like rays,

but to be honest with you, I really just wanted to include them for their googly eyes and perpetually surprised expressions, which in my opinion makes them a bit convergent with surprise Pikachu, if you think about it. But don't be fooled, for this was not an adaptation to make animals think it was cute. Rather, some members had this sort of open-mouth design that allowed them to quickly gobble up any prey drifting above them, while their funny, googly little eyes were probably used to easily detect potential danger in the area, or to spot prey.

In considering stingrays have their twins, you better not expect mantarays to escape this phenomena either, because if you travel to the Cretaceous, you would find the Aquila Lama, an odd creature with prominent wings, or rather flippers. These guys, as far as we know, were limited to waters around Mexico, where they developed long and narrow wings tens of millions of years before Manta rays did, and also evolved a filter-feeding diet, making them that much closer to rays. But unlike rays, Aquila Lama was not a member of the myelobatoforms,

to which rays belonged to. But rather, it has been tentatively defined as a mackerel shark. In other words, it is more closer related to Great Whites, or the megalon, than it was to any ray. And the one partial giveaway is that beyond its wings, you notice that its body was more torpedo-shaped, as seen in mackerel sharks. Furthermore, another distinguishing factor

is that it likely did not fly through the water by flapping its wings, but instead achieved propulsion by using its tail to propel itself, while its wings simply acted as gliders, allowing it to seamlessly glide and conserve energy. And this worked wonders for it, which is why maybe researchers think it only went bust

following the KT extinction, and why a similar design emerged independently millions of years later. And now millions of years is a big lapse in time, but it is nothing compared to the gap scene in something that eerily resembles an animal close to our own hearts. Monkeys. What you are looking at here is not a proto-monkey, or even a long-lost ancestor to primates,

but rather a reptilian monkey-like creature that evolved 268 million years ago during the Permian period, the Suminia. It was quite similar in size to the smaller, monkeys of today. Yet what really made it a fascinating creature was that it independently evolved two pretty rare features, both shared by monkeys. One being prehensile tails that allowed it to grasp and hold on to items, and even more rare, fully opposable thumbs, which is also shared by yours truly. Now, multiple animals do have prehensile tails and opposable fingers, but very few

times has an animal evolved both. Plus the fact that it evolved these features over 200 million years before monkeys even appeared is something to consider as well. And then on top of this, there's even new evidence which suggests that it also had opposable toes, which seriously makes it the closest thing to a reptilian monkey. And unsurprisingly, it lived a lot like one too, using its array of tools to live a highly arboreal lifestyle in the Permian trees, where it probably did not feast on meat, but rather leaves, as it was canine-less and in many teeth that were perfectly shaped for shearing and processing leaves, while its hands, feet, and tail kept it securely fastened to the tree it was in.

Oh, and I should mention that it probably was hairy too, which is crazy because it was a reptile, remember. And we know this because loose remains suggest that it had some form of primitive hair that covered his body, making it hard to believe that everything about it had absolutely nothing to do with the tree lovers we know of today, and of course that it wasn't even a mammal, with it being closer to a snake than a monkey. So to conclude, convergent evolution equals amazing. Now I will say, while it might seem that this list is extensive, it should still be remembered as striking examples are the exception, not the norm.

But it does again bring to light how environments and niches may be the biggest factor in how we look. And even in less obvious cases, we see just how prevalent convergent evolution is. I mean, take the giant panda, for instance, a large browser that feeds selectively whilst in a bipedal position. Nothing crazy. And yet, you see similar builds this and multiple unrelated animals. but who do have related lifestyles, like the giant sloth megatherium, the bizarre calicotheirs,

and even dinosaurs, such as the therazinosaurus, who like the rest, sported long claws as well that might have aided in shearing leaves off branches, as pandas, calicotheirs, and sloths did too. And all this converging makes you wonder, if nothing ever went extinct, then would the world actually look not so far off than it does now? And the answer is, who knows? Thanks for watching, and until next time, on extinct zoo.