Re: Optimal diversification in Avida
- From: "Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:57:11 -0400 (EDT)
"John Edser" <edser@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:dc1enj$1g4c$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> The fact is Haldane's Pub Rule and Hamilton's Rule differ in their
> inclusive fitness result. Using Haldane's Pub Rule, fitness is
> transferred to the parents as recipients so maximal relatedness can be
> the often employed r=0.5 IBD. However, when using Hamilton's Rule
> fitness can only be transferred to the offspring of these recipient
> parents and not to the parents themselves which is one more generation
> removed. This reduces maximal possible relatedness r with normal sex to
> be r=0.25 IBD. Thus Hamilton would only sacrifice himself for FOUR
> brothers or SIXTEEN first cousins and not Haldane's two brothers or
> eight first cousins.
I don't follow you John. Suppose the donor is me (fertile adult)
and the recipient is my full brother (also fertile adult). I
assume we were both produced by normal sex, but if necessary, I can
ask. What do you think that the relatedness "r" is between us?
What am I missing here?
.
- References:
- Re: Optimal diversification in Avida
- From: John Edser
- Re: Optimal diversification in Avida
- Prev by Date: Re: Article: On Scale and Complexity
- Next by Date: Re: About hybrids
- Previous by thread: Re: Optimal diversification in Avida
- Next by thread: Re: Optimal diversification in Avida
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
