RE: Dawkins & Convergent Evolution- the final word (?)

From: Vincent Campbell (v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk)
Date: Mon Aug 27 2001 - 12:40:13 BST

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: Coordinated behavior among birds, fish, and insects"

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA07848 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk); Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:50:24 +0100
    Message-ID: <2D1C159B783DD211808A006008062D310174604E@inchna.stir.ac.uk>
    From: Vincent Campbell <v.p.campbell@stir.ac.uk>
    To: "'memetics@mmu.ac.uk'" <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: Dawkins & Convergent Evolution- the final word (?)
    Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2001 12:40:13 +0100
    X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
    Content-Type: text/plain
    X-Filter-Info: UoS MailScan 0.1 [D 1]
    Sender: fmb-bounces@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

            <Dawkins does concede that evolutionary convergence is "vanishingly
    > improbable" in the neo-Darwinian model. >
    >
            No, he doesn't. What he's saying is that the probability that two
    organisms should follow exactly the same evolutionary steps- i.e. the exact
    same genetic mutations and selections- is vanishingly small. That is NOT
    what happens in convergent evolution (if it did happen it might be called
    something like parallel evolution- two organisms developing in isolation
    from each other and yet following exactly the same evolutionary
    development). In convergent evolution what happens is that consonant
    environmental pressures over a long period of time produce organisms that
    may look superficially similar, and/or exhibit similar patterns of
    behaviour, despite having followed DIFFERENT paths of evolutionary
    development. Even without looking at their genes, the fact that they've
    followed different paths is evident in their differences- the best
    collective example being marsupials.

            <As I stated before, there are numerous
    > examples of convergence with no explanation according to natural
    > selection,
    > such as traits that come in handy in relation to a predator that's never
    > existed in other locations where it crops up.>
    >
            Well, I'd like some examples here, since most that we know of
    species moving from one environment to another is usually chaos as native
    species are unable to deal with the intruders (again, Australasia with it's
    cane toad and rabbit plagues etc. etc.).

            Vincent

    -- 
    The University of Stirling is a university established in Scotland by
    charter at Stirling, FK9 4LA.  Privileged/Confidential Information may
    be contained in this message.  If you are not the addressee indicated
    in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such
    person), you may not disclose, copy or deliver this message to anyone
    and any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is
    prohibited and may be unlawful.  In such case, you should destroy this
    message and kindly notify the sender by reply email.  Please advise
    immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email
    for messages of this kind.  Opinions, conclusions and other
    information in this message that do not relate to the official
    business of the University of Stirling shall be understood as neither
    given nor endorsed by it.
    

    =============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 27 2001 - 12:59:09 BST