Re: Hamilton's rule
- From: "Anon." <bob.ohara@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:10:19 -0500 (EST)
John Edser wrote:
> "Perplexed in Peoria" jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:-
>
<snip>
The deletion of all gene
> fitness epistasis within population genetics because the Hardy-Weinberg (HW)
> bi-nominal expansion required it has never been corrected.
>
You could just as well write "The deletionof all fitness within
population genetics...". You would then be arguing that we have deleted
all fitness from population genetics, an argument that is just as valid.
You're also up agoinst history: the first paper on natural selection in
Mendelain populations (Fisher, 1918) included epistasis.
Bob
--
Bob O'Hara
Dept. of Mathematics and Statistics
P.O. Box 68 (Gustaf H?llstr?min katu 2b)
FIN-00014 University of Helsinki
Finland
Telephone: +358-9-191 51479
Mobile: +358 50 599 0540
Fax: +358-9-191 51400
WWW: http://www.RNI.Helsinki.FI/~boh/
Journal of Negative Results - EEB: http://www.jnr-eeb.org
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Interrelation between Sex and Death
- Next by Date: Re: Group selected altruism - (was: Hamilton's rule)
- Previous by thread: Re: Interrelation between Sex and Death
- Next by thread: Re: Hamilton's rule
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
