Re: Misunderstood Cichlids

From: Chris Taylor (
Date: Fri Aug 31 2001 - 16:59:23 BST

  • Next message: Scott Chase: "Re: Misunderstood Cichlids"

    Received: by id RAA18138 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 17:01:22 +0100
    Message-ID: <>
    Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 16:59:23 +0100
    From: Chris Taylor <>
    Organization: University of Manchester
    X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
    X-Accept-Language: en
    Subject: Re: Misunderstood Cichlids
    References: <>
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
    Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
    Precedence: bulk

    > Maybe the cichlids are quick studies, their rapid rates of speciational
    > evolution a testament to fast learning, not unlike cramming for an exam,
    > except that the crammers resonate amongst themselves.

    That's testable, I wonder if anyone has done it (there are estimates of
    diversity, but I didn't see any about response to selection as such).

    > Since isolation is related to speciation, we may have a slight problem. A
    > population may become physically isolated from another of the same species
    > by a geographical barrier, but as MR theory claims there is spooky action at
    > a distance. This action at a distance, if it can influence crystal growth
    > and rodent learning in locales far removed, shouldn't have much problem
    > jumping across a wimpy little geographical barrier. Wouldn't resonance and
    > formative causation run counter to geographical isolation? Why would local
    > demes diverge from those similar to them yet geographically isolated?
    > The separated populations will, especially if small in effective size, be
    > skewed samples of the original larger population and genetic drift would
    > foster a genetic rift. Selection would adapt them to their local conditions
    > and if these conditions are similar in some respects, the adaptations of the
    > speciating subpopulations will converge or parallel in these respects. Where
    > would resonance come into the picture? In the respects where the local
    > conditions differ selection would result in a divergence of correlated
    > features of the phenotypes of the repective subpopulations. Of course, drift
    > itself or some sort of founder effect would also have played a part in
    > divergence from the original population.

    <applause> And *that* is a bloody marvellous point. </applause>
    Similar to the de novo flight/homeothermy/etc one. Ted's turn...

     Chris Taylor ( »people»chris

    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)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 31 2001 - 17:06:04 BST