Why aren't there any mammals with green fur?

Question

And green stuff growing in the fur doesn't count. You see so many green-feathered birds, but not green furred critters that I can think of. What gives?

Answer 1

You're thinking that a tiger with green fur would sneak up on prey in the green grass easier? Why didn't tigers evolve with green fur then?

The reason is that green grass on dry land is actually a fairly recent development. 120 million years ago, their fur did blend in naturally with the distinct earth tones of the land, in that time.

Green grass lived in the shallow ponds and lakes. Frogs, water snakes, alligators who lived in those grassy swamps all share the distinctive green coloring that allowed them to blend in nicely. For the very same reasons that tigers are orange and black, alligators are green.

Answer 2

The fact that no animals exist with green fur SUPPORTS evolution.

Think about it: We, as mammals, all evolved (over time) from a prototype mammalian ancestor. The ancestral condition (and its hair/fur color) is the starting point- Some descendants change slightly over time by means of genetic variation, others retain the ancestral condition. From wikipedia: "Brown hair/fur is characterized by very high levels of the dark pigment eumelanin and lower levels of the pale pigment phaeomelanin. Its strands are thicker than those of fair hair but not as much as those of red hair." When we look at what actually creates hair color, we see that it is simply different types of melanin... and our earliest mammalian ancestor probably, therefore, possessed melanin- Thus, we now see a variety of different shades of dark/light melanin-based colors in mammals, but they are all derivations of the ancestral condition. We have changed, but we've only changed within the confines of the ancestral condition.

It is logical to assume that, if a mammal was -as the result of some spontaneous genetic mutation- born with green or purple fur, it would have been more visible to predators. Whereas, an individual who possessed brown fur would have been camouflaged against the dirt or dark forest. The trait of bright fur, therefore, would have been selected against, as bright colored mammals would have been killed more readily by predators.

Birds, on the other hand, can 'afford' to be green because they can easily escape a terrestrial predator by flying away. Also, it is believed that such striking colors in birds actually proved beneficial: A male bird displaying brighter colors is more attractive to female birds. He who can attract more mates reproduces more, thus passing down his genetic material (including the genes that control the bright coloration). Color, then, is thus a beneficial evolutionary trait because it provides a selective advantage to the individual in terms of allowing him to pass on his genes.

Answer 3

an animals fur or feather is designed not to stand out but to blend in, bird that are the most colorful are the males. they use that color to attract mates and lead predators away from their plainer mates and young. also birds are up in the trees and near flower that are green and colorful and this provides them with a form of camouflage..animals are ground dwellers for the most part and their fur is meant to hide them amongst the dirt and bark of trees, you know the brown and black stuff. color is dictated by the environment that an animal evolved in and what predator it was trying to hide from, and green is not a good color for that on the ground.

Answer 4

Uhm... it rather is an exciting question and a powerful one to brood on for a on an identical time as. My concepts are that it rather is the two linked to camouflage as some others have already stated, or with the usually unfavorable shade resourceful and prescient of mammals. on the only hand, a mammal, unlike a grasshopper, in lots of situations merely isn't flawed for a leaf, in view that mammals sufficiently small for that must be in especially much consistent action to get the nutrition they want, and mammals larger than that are... nicely, merely too great to look like leaves. ok then, yet we've varanid lizards who're extremely great and frequently lively, and all green (see the wikipedia article for lizards, there's a stunning image of the fairway tree video reveal lizard there). Why have they have been given green species on an identical time as mammals do no longer? the achievable answer might lie interior the adjustments of their shade resourceful and prescient. Reptiles (and fishes and birds) oftentimes see colorings way greater effective than mammals do (they have a bent to have 3 (or maybe 4) varieties of shade receptors on an identical time as maximum mammals have purely 2). colorings do no longer purely serve camouflage, they are in a position to even have social applications. One occasion the place i'm especially much specific shade is social rather than camouflage-orientated is the fairway lizard of Europe, Lacerta viridis, which i myself have seen quite a few situations. Why might men be critically greener than women folk if the colour have been purely for hiding? men and girls have the comparable habitat, so that they had want the comparable camouflage. i assume colorings merely do no longer recommend that lots for mammals. In maximum environments, spots and stripes are merely as stable for hiding as colorings, and whether colour is utilized in intra- or interspecific communications, it rather is extremely contained in this variety of staggering kinds (like the black and white stripes of skunks) than colorings. There are no green mammals, yet there are not blue or pink mammals the two (purely between primates -see mandrills-, a number of which, alongside with our ancestors, had regained a 0.33 variety of shade receptor). that's how I see issues, yet i may be very involved interior the respond of somebody who incredibly has perception into those issues.

Answer 5

In nature, green would make almost any animal with fur, stand out like a sore thumb. In nature, animals are the colors they are, through natural selection. Predators blend in with there surroundings, so they can be effective hunters. Prey animals, are the colors they are, so they can blend in to there environment. This makes it difficult for these animals to be spotted, by potential predators.
Many birds, have bits of green, mixed in with there feathers, for exactly the same reasons. It either, makes it easier for them to hunt there prey, or it makes animals hunting them, more difficult to spot them.

Answer 6

While I've never seen one myself, I have read that
there are a few mammals that are at least partly
green. They are squirrels and other arboreal
mammals which, as camouflage, are colored
green on top and orange underneath. There are
other arboreal vertebrates with similar coloration
for the same reason. They live in tropical forests
for the most part, high in the trees where they are
not often seen.

Answer 7

Evolution.As you said,birds who spend time in trees surrounded by leaves are less likely to be spotted if they have green feathers.However a green-furred gazelle roaming the savannahs of Africa is a prime target for predators,therefore it is not a evolutionary preferred phenotype.

Answer 8

Most mammals are omnivores. They may mistake a green furred animal for an edible plant.

Answer 9

well.example:a bear need its fur for the cold times and to protect it and grows claws to defend.a bird can get its color changed by evolution alot faster than the bear and since the color of the bird(GREEN)might protect him more than if he were brown like the bear then it sticks with the green.

Answer 10

Actually, there are sloths in Madagascar and Indonesia that move so slow that green moss grows on their fur.