# Another Parthenogenesis Question **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 6, 2013, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-parthenogenesis-question/665455 "2013-08-06T00:43:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![dolphinboy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dolphinboy/32/330_2.png) [@dolphinboy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dolphinboy)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-parthenogenesis-question/665455/1 "2013-08-06T00:43:16Z")
Okay, I get it. From reading [this](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partheogenesis#Mammals)I think I understand the disadvantages of fatherless reproduction, but that leads to another question… Why does parthenogenesis work for any invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles and birds? How can the whiptail lizard compete and survive without the genetic mixing that happens with all the other creatures that live in the desert? And if it works for the whiptail, why doesn’t it work for other desert lizards, or for that matter desert mammals? ---
**Author:** ![aNewLeaf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ac91a4/32.png) [@aNewLeaf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aNewLeaf)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-parthenogenesis-question/665455/2 "2013-08-06T01:08:23Z")
It’s fine if there’s never a change in the ecological niche. As each individual is a twin of every other, all are equally adapted to the environment. All their eggs are in that one basket. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-parthenogenesis-question/665455/3 "2013-08-06T02:41:28Z")
The whiptail is also closely related to other species that aren’t exclusively parthenogenic. It’s easy to evolve something like the whiptail from those closely-related species, so it might well have been a very recent speciation. Maybe the environment has just stayed stable enough for that time that it just hasn’t been an issue, yet. ---
**Author:** ![robert\_columbia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e79b87/32.png) [@robert\_columbia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robert_columbia)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-parthenogenesis-question/665455/4 "2013-08-06T02:45:28Z")
There once was a mudpuppy from Hoover, (in Alabama, not in Vancouver). He found an old Rhesus Who said “Parthenogenesis Requires no copulating maneuver.” ---
**Author:** ![Isilder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/cc9497/32.png) [@Isilder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isilder)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2013, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-parthenogenesis-question/665455/5 "2013-08-06T03:01:44Z")
> [@dolphinboy](#): > > Okay, I get it. From reading [this](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partheogenesis#Mammals)I think I understand the disadvantages of fatherless reproduction, but that leads to another question… > > Why does parthenogenesis work for any invertebrates, fish, amphibians, reptiles and birds? How can the whiptail lizard compete and survive without the genetic mixing that happens with all the other creatures that live in the desert? And if it works for the whiptail, why doesn’t it work for other desert lizards, or for that matter desert mammals? Did it work for the whiptail ? What is the test of “work” ? If you had to pick a number of years of survival as the definition of “work” , what would that be ? Thousands of years ? Hundreds of Thousands ? Millions ? They are (probably) doomed because they are unable to evolve rapidly. Should they be transported to a new environment, they might not be able to evolve to suit it. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2020, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-parthenogenesis-question/665455/6 "2020-03-10T13:53:13Z")
Bumped. The Chattanooga Zoo’s komodo dragon just did it: [A komodo dragon with no male partner gave birth to three hatchlings | CNN](https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/09/us/komodo-dragons-parthenogenesis-scn-trnd/index.html) ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2020, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-parthenogenesis-question/665455/7 "2020-03-10T16:22:32Z")
But is that “occasional” or exclusive reproductive capability? Being able to do so occasionally is a survival mechanism when the population is limited. I see how it could evolve into exclusive behaviour if some females started making it a habit. Basically, an occasional occurrence could morph into the new standard. However, it means that the resulting species is less likely to survive. A single line might come up with an advantageous mutation to handle changing circumstances, but if there are two mutations for addressing two environmental factors, there’s no way to mix them into a single species.