49 Answers

  1. I fully support the answer given earlier, since it is the closest to the truth, but I want to give an explanation of why the question about the egg and the chicken itself is not entirely correct. Let us turn to the paradox of Theseus ' Ship:

    The ship on which Theseus returned from Crete to Athens was kept by the Athenians and sent annually with a sacred embassy to Delos. When it was repaired, the planks were gradually replaced, until there was a dispute among philosophers whether this was still the same ship, or already another, new one.

    Which egg can be considered the firstborn and which bird is the firstborn chicken?

  2. Of course, the egg. There was a no-hen, krak! – mutation. The mutation did not make the non-chicken in whose germ cells this krak occurred a chicken. But her mutant egg is already a chicken egg. Carried by a non-chicken. And from this chicken egg, the first hen has already hatched.

    Well, a joke, of course: it is clear that evolution is based on the trigger principle: click – a change of species in one generation, it is unlikely to work, at least not in birds.

    But what question is the answer)) In the logic of the question , the answer is accurate and completely correct. Well, I think so)�

    Ah! And-good dreams!

  3. The chicken came later. Birds in general historically appeared much later than the first oviparous reptiles. No one had ever flown in the sky before, and eggs were already plentiful.

  4. It is very difficult to determine the boundary when some proto-Chickens became early hens. If a researcher found himself in the middle of a pack of such creatures, he would hesitate for a long time, conduct gene analysis, and try to cross the undersized cat with modern breeds.

    Perhaps he would eventually wince and assume that the red-headed half-cockerel over there might be the first member of a new species. This would be done more for journalists and grant distributors than for the scientific community.

    In this case, just as wincing from the stretch, we will have to admit that the mother of the first chicken was simply not a chicken, but a representative of the previous species. And therefore, the egg was the first to appear.

  5. This is the eighth time this question has been asked. Go to the search, write “chicken or egg” and see all the others.

    It seems to me that for some questions (for example, “why do they write about ISIS that it is an organization banned in Russia”), you need to make a special script that would write to the author “No! That's enough! Stop it!”or something like that 🙂

  6. An egg, of course. After all, a chicken is a bird that meets certain criteria that it has acquired as a species in the course of evolution. And evolution, as we know, is a natural process of development of wildlife, accompanied by changes in the genetic composition of populations. A change in the genetic composition occurs from parent to offspring, and therefore there is an individual that will meet the criteria of “chicken” but its parents will not meet. And this chicken of ours will appear from the egg. The first egg b from which the first hen will hatch and not something close to it but not quite.

  7. The question is no longer relevant. Birds are an offshoot of egg-laying reptiles. That is, eggs appeared long before any chicken. In addition, many scientists consider the terrestrial lifestyle of birds to be a later change than the ability to fly. That is, the ancestors of the hen flew and laid eggs. Avian

  8. According to the theory of evolution, the hen had ancestors who reproduced with eggs, but were not hens. Their eggs were earlier than the hens. True, their eggs were not chicken eggs, but you did not ask about the chicken egg.

  9. The egg will not appear without the rooster. So first there was the rooster and the chicken.

    In order for a chick to hatch from an egg, the hen must hatch this egg, must protect it. The rooster protects her at this time, to the best of his ability, of course. Therefore, the egg can not be primary in any way.

  10. an age-old question, but in my opinion not so difficult:a chicken is a bird, birds appeared after dinosaurs(if you believe modern science, then birds descended from dinosaurs), dinosaurs laid eggs, and before them reptiles laid eggs, it turns out that eggs were long before the appearance of chickens…. but even if you take only bird eggs,then here,the egg was before the chicken because the chicken was not the first bird…

  11. The whole question is in the wording. If the egg is in principle, then, of course, the first option. Eggs were there long before birds appeared: in amphibians, in fish. And if it's a chicken egg, then it's obviously later than the chicken, because only an egg produced by a chicken can be called a chicken egg.

  12. How can a creature evolve like this in life? The embryo is much more ideal in this case than the ancestor. Therefore, it would be more logical to assume that it was not some “nedokuritsa” who mutated to the usual form for 5 years of her life, but already her descendants were born like this. I.e. first there was a chicken egg.�

    Please correct me if I'm wrong.

  13. I adhere to the fact that the egg, in view of the fact that evolution usually goes through the offspring, and there are major changes, due to the fact that there are much more opportunities for this, because there is a crossing (exchange of gene regions, which leads to a unique combination of them), changes in which are inherited, at the same time, such changes in adults occur either in adaptive variability, which usually does not carry such drastic changes, or in the process of mutations, which do not always occur, there are a lot of conventions. Let's take the simplest example from breeding: when crossing different plants (the same principle applies to animals), if they are compatible, you can get a new species with a new set of characteristics, which in turn will give offspring, but this species will appear in the seed, and the parents will still be different.
    I hope I didn't mess up and answered your question correctly.
    PS to understand this process, you don't need to try to find something in the past, just look at different types of chickens, most of them are artificially bred, and the process of crossing different species is described in detail there.

  14. earlier there was an eagle who stuck his head in a pit with worms that is now covered with pyramids they gnawed his head, then he found an eaglechicken and only then an egg appeared in its modern sense (right now it is very harmful to eat it because that eagle is very gnawed head)

  15. It all depends on what is considered a chicken egg-the egg from which the first hen hatched (even though it was laid by a bird of another species —the pre-chicken), or the first egg laid by a bird that is a chicken. Depending on one's personal view of this condition, the first was either a chicken egg laid by a non-chicken, or a chicken hatched from a non —chicken egg.

  16. Egg.Birds are descended from reptiles,which means that the first bird hatched from an egg laid by a reptile.

    I didn't think it would ever come in handy)

  17. After analyzing the shape of the eggs before and after the mass extinction of dinosaurs at the border of the Mesozoic and Cenozoic eras (about 65 million years ago), scientists came to the conclusion that Mesozoic bird eggs were very diverse in shape, they are

    they were more elongated and symmetrical. That is, roughly speaking, first the dinosaur laid an egg of the desired shape, and then the chicken was able to hatch from it. This process, however, took, if not millions, then hundreds of thousands of years, so exactly.

  18. Egg. Birds evolved from reptiles, which also hatch from eggs. Thus, the first creature as close as possible to a chicken hatched from a reptilian egg.

  19. If you believe Darwin's theory, then birds are descended from reptiles, so that the chicken appeared earlier than the chicken egg.

    P.S. the question is about the chicken egg, otherwise it would not be so interesting

  20. The egg was the first to appear, because all the same evolution does its job. For example, an egg appears in a reptile, after a thousand years something like a bird hatches from such an egg, and after a certain number of years wild chickens appear 😉

  21. I'm not a biologist, but the answer is very simple and clear: A distant relative of the chicken, laid an egg, more-evolved offspring and became a chicken. This means that the egg first appeared(from the chicken's ancestor), and then a new “descendant” of the chicken's ancestor, now known as the chicken, was born. You can even quote me to your kids.

  22. I have said and will continue to say: the answer is very simple — the egg appeared earlier. Which was demolished by the chicken's ancestor. And in general, eggs were long before the appearance of birds on Earth.

  23. On the International Day of Philosophy, SOLVING PARADOXES: 1. ” What was before: egg or chicken?”

    Two concepts “EGG” and “CHICKEN” are given, and in a SERIES of SEQUENTIALLY DEVELOPED CONCEPTS (RPRP), it is necessary to find the concepts preceding each of them.

    In the RPRP, “EGG” is preceded by “CHICKEN”, because the concept of “embryo” (or others ) we can ignore those that are not of interest to us in the formulation of the question.

    In the RPRP, the neglected concept for” CHICKEN “is” chicken”, but not” cracked egg (from which the chicken is trying to hatch)”, because in the formulation of the question, attention is not focused on the obligation to consider only the egg of the integral state, i.e. for” CHICKEN ” the previous one is not the concept on which the question is focused, but its variety.


  24. If you philosophize, then you can safely say that the chicken.Let's take a biblical story.The first appeared Adam,in our case a rooster, the second Eve, similarly a chicken, and after fertilization, the embryo appears.Since the embryo = egg, the chicken was the first to appear.

  25. If this new copy of the question has generated new answers, then:

    There is a predkuritsa and a pre-petukh. The sun is shining, there is all sorts of radiation, other mutagens. And now the egg or sperm, the carriers of information about the future child of the pre-chicken and pre-baby, are damaged. The ancestress lays a fertilized egg with a defect, but the defect is such that the new creature turns out to be a chicken.

    Then there will be a question – what was the first, pre-chicken or pre-chicken egg.

    Eggs-caviar as a method of reproduction appeared long before fish. All sorts of worms, for example, invertebrates, also multiply in this way.

    In the end, this question will be reduced to a question:

    what was before — DNA or DNA ))

    After all DNA is the most important thing an egg and a chicken:


    In living organisms, almost all processes occur mainly due to enzymes of a protein nature. Proteins, however, cannot self-replicate and are synthesized de novo in the cell based on information stored in the DNA. But the doubling of DNA occurs only due to the participation of proteins and RNA. A vicious circle is formed, because of which, in the framework of the theory of the spontaneous generation of life, it was necessary to recognize the need not only for abiogenic synthesis of both classes of molecules, but also for the spontaneous emergence of a complex system of their interrelation.

    ============= wiki

    The next theory and hypothesis was that RNA can exist completely autonomously, and it was the first chicken-egg.

    That is, seriously, the question of the topic – where did the DNA and RNA come from?

    The first traces of life are now considered to be eoarchean stromatolites-products of the activity of cyanobacterial communities. This means that life appeared very quickly – at the same time as the solid earth's crust.

  26. The whole question is in the wording. If the egg is in principle, then, of course, the first option. Eggs were there long before birds came along. And if it is a chicken egg, then it is obviously later than the chicken, because only the egg produced by the chicken can be called chicken.

  27. I've never understood why this question causes difficulties. It is logical that the chicken appeared from the egg, so the chicken in any case appeared later.

  28. The egg came first, if you mean the egg itself. Oviposition was found in dinosaurs that existed long before the appearance of the chicken.

  29. First there are parents, and then children. This is a class approach. Inheritance property.�

    And from a religious point of view, so it is. Adam and Eve have no parents. There is a creator, but no parents.

  30. This is an example of sophistry or a question where both statements can be true. In fact, we are talking about a chain of eggs and chickens up to the first founder of the species, and then you can extend it to embryos and spermatozoa.

  31. There are two main theories about this: religious and scientific. The first is that the chicken was created and therefore originally appeared as a chicken, not an egg. The second claims that chickens appeared in the ode of evolution, because they, of course, did not originally exist. Therefore, first there was a certain egg, from which the hen later hatched.

  32. The boundary of a new biological species may be conditional, but the egg carries the same set of genes as the bird that develops from it. The chicken egg appeared earlier than the chicken.

  33. If we take evolution as a basis, then the egg of the great-prakuritsa from which the prakuritsa hatched, which then also laid the egg from which the chicken hatched. Well, or something like that.

  34. The egg that the protokuritsa laid. On Anthropogenesis, it seems that this issue is very well solved by experts-they remove all the charm and destroy the philosophical halo.

  35. Egg.It is known that in the course of life, the genetic material remains unchanged, i.e. an adult bird-the ancestor of a chicken-could not mutate into a chicken after hatching from an egg. This means that the mutation that led to the appearance of a new biological species could only occur at the embryo stage-inside the egg. Thus, the hen could have hatched from an egg laid by a non-chicken ancestor bird. So in an evolutionary sense, the egg was the first.

  36. If you take eggs at all, then the egg, of course, was the first. If you take specifically a chicken egg, then everything is more complicated.

    The chicken, like any other creature, appeared as a result of evolution. Evolution is a gradual process, but changes only occur over generations (your child will be slightly” more advanced ” than you at the genetic level.

    You can't pinpoint the exact moment when a chicken's ancestor gave birth to a chicken. It wasn't immediately clear. The changes were so minor that they are simply not noticeable. But let's assume that we have a set of criteria by which we determine the chicken genome.

    And here comes the X – moment. The chicken ancestor once hatches the egg of a “modern” chicken. As I said, changes occur over generations, so the genome is first laid in the egg (before birth, just like in humans).

    That is, the chicken egg appeared before the chicken.

    I hope it was really important.

  37. Of course, the egg appeared earlier, and much earlier. This happened about a billion years ago. Dinosaur eggs (very similar to chicken eggs) – about 225 million years ago. And the first prehistoric chickens (the ancestors of modern chickens)only about 90 million years ago.

  38. In general,funny as it may seem,the debate on this topic is still ongoing.
    But let's speculate for ourselves and talk about…reproduction!So, as you know, in the process of reproduction, the male body transmits its genetic information to the female in the form of DNA.And,as you know, replication(creating synchronized copies of DNA molecules)is never 100% accurate.And, as you know,new changes appear in new organisms, scientifically called mutations.Mutations are known to occur in the zygote or initial cell.So, these same mutations in the process of many hundreds,thousands,hundreds of thousands of years create new biological species.And now we seem to have come to the culmination of our logical and biological chain:a certain ancestor of the chicken, which we will call proto-chicken, falls in love with the male ancestor of the chicken,which we will call proto-petuch.Of course, maybe there was no love, but the proto-petukh in any case passed on his genetic information to the protokuritsa.And…drum roll…trrrr…in the process of the previously mentioned mutation, the first one appeared(actually not.she was gone,just like the first person.lol) chicken!!! From which then went to the next generation of chickens and roosters, but without the prefix “proto”
    That is, based on this chain, we can safely say that the first in the “chicken or egg” dispute was won by the egg, from which the first(not the first!!!)subsequently appeared.chicken.

    UPD:If you hold a different point of view or you just didn't like my answer, then don't rush to put minuses, because where else, like in my answer, would you see a chicken in a top hat?: 3

    I hope I was able to help:)

  39. I remembered a very long-standing argument with a friend on this topic. I then also tried to select the “first”one. I also didn't really understand evolution.
    With the current stock of knowledge,I can say that he was wrong and so was I.

    The fact is that the question itself is incorrect from the point of view of evolution, because we insisted on drawing boundaries where there are none, because evolution does not occur linearly – it is a very slow, long (by our, human standards), gradual process.�
    There is no such moment when we can state :” during the ontogenesis of this individual, he has acquired such features that do not allow him to be attributed to the species to which his parents belong.” An individual may have some mutations that slightly distinguish him from his parents, but nevertheless, for example, in the history of our genus, there was no such moment when a pair of Australopithecines, after looking at a cub, decided – “Hmm, дорогая dear/dear, we have given birth to a new species!”. It is the same with chicken – there was no such moment when the chicken appeared. It gradually evolved from the type of “prakuritsa” which, like the modern one, belonged to the pheasant family. And this evolution is happening now. Probably, after a certain period of time, people will look at the “post-kur” and say that these are not the same chickens that were at the beginning of the twenty-first century. Most likely, this will happen during the spread of new mutations in the gene pool, but it will not be possible to say exactly at what point the chicken became “wrong”.
    Sorry for the liberties, I wanted to get the point across.
    George Stepiko's answer, by the way, does not contradict mine, since the mechanism of embryo development in the egg was actually used by many species even before the appearance of the pheasant family.

  40. Oh, this human love to divide ontogeny (cycles of individual development) into parts and ask what came first. The whole ontogenesis evolves, not a separate part of it. Chicken and egg in the modern sense appeared at the same time, when the whole kuroya ontogenetic cycle changed.

  41. The question is not correct. If we take into account the theory of evolution, then it will correctly sound like this:: “When did the animal that we now know as 'chicken' form?” It is obvious that the progenitor of the modern “chicken” was different from its child, which means that during the formation of the fetus in the egg, the “chicken” acquired the appearance and shape by which we now recognize it.

    But, in fact, this question is only a reworked Buddhist riddle. As you know, the Buddha is looking for a body for his reincarnation himself – he does not throw it around randomly, but the future refuge of the sage itself is looking for it. And the riddle goes like this: “Who found whom first-Buddha you, or you Buddha?”.

  42. The question should have been asked like this: what came later: chicken or CHICKEN egg. Then there would be some discussion. I think it is unlikely that in ancient times, the one who came up with this question knew about evolution and about dinosaurs.

  43. Given that the tags for the question are “zoology” and “biology”, you can answer in all seriousness: the egg appeared earlier, since egg laying as a method of reproduction is much older than the class of birds (most reptiles and amphibians are oviparous, and fish and insects are also considered to be among them, although, of course, eggs or insect eggs are not very similar to chicken eggs from the store).

  44. If we assume that a chicken egg is an egg laid by a chicken, then the chicken appeared earlier. For whatever a hen's egg is, it must be laid by a hen. But in order for a chicken to be born, it is not necessary to have a chicken egg. In the course of evolution, one bird species evolved into another, that is, in the course of random mutations from the egg of the chicken's ancestor, the chicken itself was born. And then this hen began to lay hen eggs from which other hens hatched.�If we assume that a chicken egg is the egg from which the chicken hatched, then it used to be an egg.

    But this is of course very roughly speaking, because in fact, due to the large number and insignificance of each mutation in a chain of individuals, it is not possible to determine a specific individual that will be the first representative of its species. It is like the aging of a person, it is impossible to determine the minute in which a child becomes an adult, and an adult becomes an old man. Therefore, the question can be considered not entirely correct.

  45. Eggs were laid by dinosaurs long before the appearance of the first birds. As for the question of the chicken and egg in particular, the chicken appeared later, because all evolutionary changes occur at the stage of embryo formation. The adult chicken is not known to evolve.

  46. Let's start by assuming that we mean a “chicken egg”, not any egg.�
    Further. A chicken egg is an egg that was laid by a hen and not otherwise (I think no one will argue here). Therefore, a chicken egg cannot appear without a chicken.
    Can a chicken appear without a chicken egg? Can. According to evolution, the origin of species occurs through mutations, which means that a certain chicken-like bird could lay an egg (not a chicken), from which, as a result of mutation, a chicken will appear.

  47. To find out more precisely, you just need to go down the evolutionary chain. And the lower we go, the more blurry the answer to the question will be.

    Eggs are laid by a lot of species of animals, birds, insects, fish, reptiles, amphibians… For all of them, the principle of bearing offspring outside the body is common. And if we go down this chain and trace how and at what point this method of reproduction appeared, we will see that the first one was the “chicken”. True, then it was not at all in the form of a chicken, but in the form of some worm that lived in the ocean and scattered its fertilized eggs in the form of caviar. Then, when the “chicken” got out of the ocean to land, the eggs had to be strengthened, and they became overgrown with shells.�

    But if we are interested in the chicken as a species, then take a look at this picture:

    The second one on the right is a chicken. The third from the right is Archaeopteryx. Archaeopteryx is considered the first bird from which all other birds descended. And if you exaggerate a lot, then in order for the chicken to hatch, the archaeoptericus had to first lay its archaeopteryx egg. Now imagine the sequence:

    1. Archaeopteryx hatches an egg. Here is a clutch of Archaeopteryx eggs.

    2. Archeopteryx eggs hatch into chicks. One of their chicks was found to have a mutation. He's not exactly an archaeopteryx anymore. But it was hatched from an archaeopteryx egg.�

    3. A mutant semi-archaeopteryx has grown up and is hatching its own egg. Here is a clutch of semi-archaeopteryx eggs.�

    4. Semi-Archaeopretrickian eggs hatch into chicks. One of the chicks was found to have a mutation. He's not exactly a semi-archaeopteryx anymore. But it hatched from a semi-archaeopteryx egg.

    … years passed …�

    1. Already-almost-a-hen-but-still-a-little-bit-archeopteryx hatching an egg. Here is a clutch of already-almost-chicken-but-still-slightly-archeopteric eggs.�

    2. From the already-almost-chicken-but-still-slightly-archeopteryx eggs, a chicken hatches. Here it is our chicken. But it's treading on the shell of an already-almost-chicken-but-still-slightly-archaeopteryx egg. In other words, the chicken didn't come from a chicken egg. So first there was the chicken.�

    3. A hen that has hatched from an already-almost-hen-but-still-slightly-archeopteryx egg hatches its already fully-hen eggs. And only here does the first fully chicken egg appear.�

    Anyway, it turns out that the chicken was the first to appear.

  48. I will write the same answer that Gottliebe Cormitt already wrote, but perhaps I will explain the idea more.

    From the point of view of science, a chicken can only grow from a chicken egg. Therefore, the chicken egg must have appeared before the chicken. But with a chicken egg, there is no longer such strict unambiguity. A chicken egg could have evolved from two “non-chicken” parents as a result of mutation (this is how chickens appeared).

    In fact, of course, the transformation of the” non-chicken ” into a chicken was very slow and there were many almost indistinguishable mutations that gave the chicken a modern look. But we still need to draw a line somewhere: this is a chicken, and this is no longer there. It was at this border that the first chicken egg appeared.

  49. Vague formulations are good because they allow you to give answers even to such rhetorical questions. An egg appeared earlier. It was the egg of a small predatory dinosaur, from which another small predatory dinosaur emerged, differing from the parent by a couple of small mutations. This continued for quite a long time, until the dinosaurs evolved into chickens.

Leave a Reply