Re: Haldane's Dilemma and quantitative genetics
- From: "Walter ReMine" <science@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 12:22:29 -0400 (EDT)
Wirt Atmar wrote:
... these models are not at all representative of how
evolution works and have almost no value in advancing
any physical understanding of the evolutionary process.
If I can't be any more blunt and offensive than that,
I don't know how.
I agree. "These models are not at all representative of how evolution
works" They are highly unrealistic -- wildly unrealistic -- all in
favor of evolution. That's what makes Haldane's Dilemma so
interesting.
The evolutionary clock does not run at any where
near a constant speed. Filled ecological niches occupied
by highly coevolved communities are very difficult to invade,
and thus evolution tends to come to almost a dead stop
in such situations.
That's a good point. "... thus evolution tends to come to almost a
DEAD STOP in such situations." And Haldane ignored those situations.
When we include those situations it makes Haldane's Dilemma worse.
Intense competitive interaction doesn't
allow much change.
That's another good point. "... doesn't allow much change."
Evolution does not occur in a constant-selection
panmictic pool.
That's another great point. "Evolution does NOT occur in ..."
We now have a mountain of evidence that evolution
operates in this way. Small disruptions tend to act
as "diversity pumps," while large catastrophes vacate
sufficient ecological space so as to act as "complexity
pumps."
"Small disruptions" and "large catastrophes [that] vacate sufficient
ecological space" (such as fire, flood, famine, pestilence, meteor
strikes, climate change, etc. -- which eliminate the fit and the unfit)
have a high cost of random loss. And that higher cost must be paid by
the same finite, limited reproductive excess of the species, which
leaves less left-over for paying the cost of substitution -- and that
slows the substitution rate.
But even more striking than that are the global
catastrophes of the Permo-Triassic and Cretaceous-Tertiary,
events which vacated most of ecological space, and thus
removed all "costs" associated with allelic variations for
a bit of time.
The cost of substitution is unavoidable. It cannot be "removed".
Also, "global catastrophes" have an extremely high cost of random loss.
Again, that slows down the substitution rate.
Evolution proceeds when the costs of substitution
disappear, but those costs are never governed by
some internal mechanism, but only by each
phyletic lineage's external competitive milleu.
The cost of substitution does not "disappear" (unless the substitution
rate drops to zero). ANYTIME your scenario claims the substituting
mutations increase (in number of copies, through reproductive means),
it requires extra reproduction rate -- the cost of substitution.
-- Walter ReMine
Haldane's Dilemma
http://SaintPaulScience.com/Haldane/htm
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Haldane's Dilemma and quantitative genetics
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- Re: Haldane's Dilemma and quantitative genetics
- References:
- Haldane's Dilemma and quantitative genetics
- From: Perplexed in Peoria
- Haldane's Dilemma and quantitative genetics
- Prev by Date: Re: Haldane's Dilemma and quantitative genetics
- Next by Date: Re: Convergent evolution and Intelligence
- Previous by thread: Re: Haldane's Dilemma and quantitative genetics
- Next by thread: Re: Haldane's Dilemma and quantitative genetics
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|