I was trolling the net trying to figure out if I actually understand evolution as well as I think I do (there's evidence that the incompetent tend to overestimate their competence and that the competent overestimate the competence of their fellows ... so I can't trust my own judgment and I can't trust the judgment of the competent people around me either ;-) and I came upon this paper:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/2331741806807x22/fulltext.html Table 3, under the "Intuitive (incorrect) interpretation" of "Origins of New Traits" says: "Offspring may exhibit new beneficial traits even if the parents did not possess them." -------------------------------- Now, I have to admit that I (do and did) believe that offspring can exhibit "new" beneficial (or detrimental) traits even if the parents did not possess them. Naively, I'm thinking extra fingers and autism. This is like one of those many trick questions on tests back in college, right? There is a _particular_ intuitive (incorrect) interpretation the authors are referring to, here, right? I assume(d) a "new" trait might arise via: A) Crossover; hence, the child would exhibit it when the parents did not. B) A mutation captured in the sperm or egg, perhaps brought about by some genetic change in the parent, too local for the parent to exhibit a trait from it but pervasive enough in the offspring for it to exhibit the trait (whatever it may be). C) A mutation that happens after conception but before/during differentiation. D) A radical change in the environment such that prior to the change, some trait was not apparent (if a tree falls in the forest -- semantics of "trait" and "possess") in the parent but, due to the new environment, the trait is apparent in the offspring. Having made these 3 assumptive paths explicit, I now have some questions that haven't yet succumbed to a google search: 1) When and where do the mutations that are relevant to species evolution occur? Is it in the ontogeny of the parent prior to conception? Is it at conception? Just after conception during the offspring's ontogeny? 2) Is "trait" assumed, by evolutionary biologists, to encompass both the phenotype and the genotype, the phenomena plus the mechanism? Or is "trait" purely phenomenal and even if the same trait can be achieved with multiple mechanisms, we still say the individuals exhibit the _same_ trait? Thanks for any clues.... and don't ridicule me too much ... I'm sensitive. [grin] -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-222-9095, http://agent-based-modeling.com ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
