Crinoid arms and banana plantations: an economic harvesting analogy

Abstract

The pattern of arm branching and arm morphology in the camerate crinoid family Melocrinitidae became more complex during an evolutionary sequence which extended from Late Ordovician to Late Devonian. The fully evolved melocrinitid arm pattern bears an amazing resemblance to the theoretically ideal lay-out for harvesting roads on a banana plantation. This may not be coincidental since the problems faced by a banana plantation manager are much the same as those of a crinoid: the harvesting of an evenly distributed micro-particulate resource from an area and its delivery to a central point for processing. The analogy suggests a detailed explanation of the melocrinitid morphology and evolution. It also raises the question: why did the pattern not become dominant among crinoids if it was so efficient? It may have been unlikely to evolve; it may reflect an unusual food supply. I prefer an explanation in which the plantation pattern demands a rigidity of the crinoid crown which is characteristic of camerates but is uncommon among other crinoids: the latter have adopted a strategy of feeding which emphasizes flexibility in anatomy and behavior. The banana plantation pattern is equally rare among other organisms. Thus an “ideal” may not be common in a group of organisms for cost-benefit reasons. This does not mean that the adaptationist's approach is improper, or that random, historical, or constructional constraints routinely overwhelm adaptation. Rather, it means that cost-benefit analysis should take a larger part in functional studies, as it does in natural selection, and that theoretical ideals should be viewed with caution.