Re: Hamilton's rule
- From: "John Edser" <edser@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 14:07:52 -0400 (EDT)
Catherine Woodgold wrote:-
> >> A gene is evolutionarily stable if it causes the
> >> organism to carry out the act of altruism whenever
> >> rb > c, and not to carry out the act
> >> whenever rb < c.
> > No, there may be any number of alleles of that gene that also satisfy
> > those conditions, yet may invade.
> Good point.
> Would that be because they're just as good, and
> therefore invade via genetic drift? Or because they have
> more than one function? Maybe the gene is meta-stable,
> (if that's the right word,)
> at least in a limited context in which only genes
> with only the one function of deciding whether to do
> particular acts are considered.
JE:-
No, it is because these genes code for mutualised TDF gains. Unequal
mutualism is routinely mistaken for altruism within gene centric Neo
Darwinism because Hamilton's Rule has no fitness frame of reference.
Regards,
John Edser
Independent Researcher
edser@xxxxxxxxxx
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Hamilton's rule
- Next by Date: Empirically Measuring Mutualism In Man
- Previous by thread: Re: Hamilton's rule
- Next by thread: Re: Hamilton's rule
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
