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
1202 Views
selection for suitability
- 06/08/2011 04:18:51 PM
840 Views
Thanks for your responce
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
969 Views
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
969 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
912 Views
Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:18:09 PM
925 Views
Yes it can
- 06/08/2011 07:41:59 PM
774 Views
But how?
- 06/08/2011 07:52:10 PM
987 Views
Re: Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:49:21 PM
1010 Views
I'm not sure I understand you
- 06/08/2011 08:20:44 PM
901 Views
All tautologies are truisms, but not all truisms are tautologies.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:12 PM
946 Views
Then it is still a tautology
- 06/08/2011 09:45:33 PM
944 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
1017 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
1010 Views
As I understand it
- 06/08/2011 06:04:44 PM
841 Views
Better...
- 06/08/2011 06:36:38 PM
844 Views
Did you perhaps mean "beneficial in the environment" rather than "beneficial to the environment"?
- 06/08/2011 06:34:44 PM
959 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
919 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
967 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
976 Views
How many equation's has Moraine screwed up?
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
399 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
399 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
426 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:46:54 PM
426 Views
Re: Natural selection
- 07/08/2011 03:00:30 AM
941 Views
Thanks a lot
- 07/08/2011 01:38:39 PM
1079 Views
2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:00:35 PM
825 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:33:00 PM
1045 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM
870 Views
My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:00:28 PM
922 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:37:58 PM
843 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:47:26 PM
1001 Views
