NS is the process through which evolution acts. The process itself is governed by things like biological fitness. Fitness is determined by the genotype and phenotype of an individual to produce viable offspring. NS requires a selection pressure to “do its job”.
I think what you are having an issue with (based on reading other posts) is that it is impossible for us to know which trait will be beneficial to a given species in the wild before it happens. In order to test something like this we would have to have a static environment which is hard to come by. However some have managed it. Have you ever heard of the guppy experiment? That experiment shows how selection pressure causes natural selection for a certain trait and thus can alter the gene pool (and cause micro-evolution). In this environment you can then hypothesize about what traits will enhance ones fitness given the selection pressure. Thus you have tested NS.
Edit: I wanted to add that NS is not random like most people think it is. The random portion about NS is finding out which individuals, if any, have the "right" combo of genes for a given selection pressure. Thus if a selection pressure is great enough or radical enough some species will not have the "right" genes and go extinct. NS is very specific in selecting the animals in a species with certain traits.
I think what you are having an issue with (based on reading other posts) is that it is impossible for us to know which trait will be beneficial to a given species in the wild before it happens. In order to test something like this we would have to have a static environment which is hard to come by. However some have managed it. Have you ever heard of the guppy experiment? That experiment shows how selection pressure causes natural selection for a certain trait and thus can alter the gene pool (and cause micro-evolution). In this environment you can then hypothesize about what traits will enhance ones fitness given the selection pressure. Thus you have tested NS.
Edit: I wanted to add that NS is not random like most people think it is. The random portion about NS is finding out which individuals, if any, have the "right" combo of genes for a given selection pressure. Thus if a selection pressure is great enough or radical enough some species will not have the "right" genes and go extinct. NS is very specific in selecting the animals in a species with certain traits.
This message last edited by Night Walker on 07/08/2011 at 03:08:17 AM
Natural selection
- 06/08/2011 03:51:26 PM
1204 Views
selection for suitability
- 06/08/2011 04:18:51 PM
845 Views
Thanks for your responce
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
970 Views
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
970 Views
I can't speak for LadyLorraine and won't try, but here's how I see it:
- 06/08/2011 06:49:49 PM
915 Views
Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:18:09 PM
927 Views
Yes it can
- 06/08/2011 07:41:59 PM
775 Views
But how?
- 06/08/2011 07:52:10 PM
989 Views
Re: Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:49:21 PM
1012 Views
I'm not sure I understand you
- 06/08/2011 08:20:44 PM
903 Views
All tautologies are truisms, but not all truisms are tautologies.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:12 PM
947 Views
Then it is still a tautology
- 06/08/2011 09:45:33 PM
946 Views
You can know it's beneifical to a particular individual, but it's harder to say for populations.
- 06/08/2011 10:18:16 PM
1019 Views
Maybe...
- 07/08/2011 01:55:54 PM
890 Views
I'm more inclined toward his logic, but possibly toward your conclusions.
- 09/08/2011 12:45:46 AM
950 Views
we can't really know ahead of time what makes a specific trait benefical in that environment
- 09/08/2011 06:16:02 PM
1012 Views
As I understand it
- 06/08/2011 06:04:44 PM
843 Views
Better...
- 06/08/2011 06:36:38 PM
846 Views
Did you perhaps mean "beneficial in the environment" rather than "beneficial to the environment"?
- 06/08/2011 06:34:44 PM
960 Views
yes. I did not really phrase that very clearly. *NM*
- 09/08/2011 06:14:11 PM
381 Views
No biggy; from what Bram said, I underestimated how well you were understood anyway.
- 09/08/2011 06:45:16 PM
880 Views
Hmmm... there's some truth to that
- 06/08/2011 06:36:35 PM
921 Views
The complexity of the problem makes it all but impossible to falsify...
- 06/08/2011 08:26:06 PM
933 Views
The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 08:38:31 PM
969 Views
Re: The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 09:10:32 PM
938 Views
I think I know why you don't understand my question.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:41 PM
978 Views
How many equation's has Moraine screwed up?
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
400 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
400 Views
100% I think Moriaine is a very beneficial trait that contributes a lot to the RAFO pool
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:46:54 PM
427 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:46:54 PM
427 Views
Re: Natural selection
- 07/08/2011 03:00:30 AM
943 Views
Thanks a lot
- 07/08/2011 01:38:39 PM
1081 Views
2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:00:35 PM
825 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:33:00 PM
1048 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM
872 Views
My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:00:28 PM
922 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:37:58 PM
844 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:47:26 PM
1001 Views
