4/25/98, boddhisatva [??? give me a break] wrote:
> C. Jones wrote: "as Eugene Odum says, the tendency that seems to
>characterize natural ecosystems is that of maximizing the quality of the
>overall environment for the mutual benefit of all species within it." This
>is untrue and it characterizes the problem of philosophizing ecology. All
>species are in it for themselves and, where they can, dominant species
>will crowd out the growth of other species and create relatively
>non-diverse systems. Only if these systems are invaded by another species
>that can overcome the defenses of the dominant species and/or use the
>resources not maximized by the dominant species does a dominant species
>fall away.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, what _you say is untrue, C. Jones is 100% right.
He is describing an empirical observation, you are quoting a theory.
A theory can never refute empirical evidence.
In the African plains, for example, the predator species have elaborate
evolved mechanisms to self-limit their populations; if they didn't,
they'd wipe out their prey species.
Deer populations, when deprived of predators, generally deteriorate
rapidly due to evolutionaryily-unexpected survival of defective
individuals.
Species do _not evolve on their own, they _co-evolve as part of an ecosystem.
The proper unit of study in ecology is the ecosystem as a whole, nothing
less.
Whoever this self-proclaimed boddhisatva is, he might profitably return to
his tree and contemplate why he is so hung up on proseletyzing dominance.
rkm
