Re: Sex for diversity or diversity repression?
- From: "Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 16:55:24 -0400 (EDT)
"phillip smith" <philge@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:e4e6cv$1n7b$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The genetic environment experienced by a locus doesn't change between
the time of development and the time of selection.
It does, every cell division probably carries a new mutation so every
cell is likely to be new genetic environment. Even if you use drakes
constant of 3 x 10^-3 which is probably at least 1 magnitude to low
there is 333 different genomes per cm^3 of cells in human(1 billion
cells). I think both time of development and time of selection are
dubious concepts and I can't see how you could seperate them.
Presumably every moment of my life I am "undervselection"
What you say may be true in the real world, but it is not the
case in Waddington's model. And it was the model that was under
discussion. I will leave it to John Edser to explain why Waddington
chose to make his point (regarding the consistency of his notion
of genetic assimilation with NS) using such an (over?) simplified
model and to defend Waddington's decision to do so.
.
- References:
- Re: Sex for diversity or diversity repression?
- From: John Edser
- Re: Sex for diversity or diversity repression?
- From: phillip smith
- Re: Sex for diversity or diversity repression?
- Prev by Date: Re: plankton and the cambrian 'explosion'
- Next by Date: Article: Small Molecule Interactions Were Central To The Origin Of Life
- Previous by thread: Re: Sex for diversity or diversity repression?
- Next by thread: Re: Sex for diversity or diversity repression?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
