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
1235 Views
selection for suitability
- 06/08/2011 04:18:51 PM
874 Views
Thanks for your responce
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
995 Views
- 06/08/2011 04:41:20 PM
995 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
949 Views
Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:18:09 PM
958 Views
Yes it can
- 06/08/2011 07:41:59 PM
798 Views
But how?
- 06/08/2011 07:52:10 PM
1016 Views
Re: Just a question
- 06/08/2011 07:49:21 PM
1045 Views
I'm not sure I understand you
- 06/08/2011 08:20:44 PM
943 Views
All tautologies are truisms, but not all truisms are tautologies.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:12 PM
986 Views
Then it is still a tautology
- 06/08/2011 09:45:33 PM
996 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
1059 Views
Maybe...
- 07/08/2011 01:55:54 PM
932 Views
I'm more inclined toward his logic, but possibly toward your conclusions.
- 09/08/2011 12:45:46 AM
992 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
1046 Views
As I understand it
- 06/08/2011 06:04:44 PM
876 Views
Better...
- 06/08/2011 06:36:38 PM
872 Views
Did you perhaps mean "beneficial in the environment" rather than "beneficial to the environment"?
- 06/08/2011 06:34:44 PM
991 Views
yes. I did not really phrase that very clearly. *NM*
- 09/08/2011 06:14:11 PM
396 Views
No biggy; from what Bram said, I underestimated how well you were understood anyway.
- 09/08/2011 06:45:16 PM
919 Views
Hmmm... there's some truth to that
- 06/08/2011 06:36:35 PM
961 Views
The complexity of the problem makes it all but impossible to falsify...
- 06/08/2011 08:26:06 PM
970 Views
The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 08:38:31 PM
1002 Views
Re: The questions go deeper
- 06/08/2011 09:10:32 PM
981 Views
I think I know why you don't understand my question.
- 06/08/2011 09:38:41 PM
1010 Views
How many equation's has Moraine screwed up?
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
413 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:45:36 PM
413 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
441 Views
*NM*
- 06/08/2011 09:46:54 PM
441 Views
Re: Natural selection
- 07/08/2011 03:00:30 AM
977 Views
Thanks a lot
- 07/08/2011 01:38:39 PM
1108 Views
2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:00:35 PM
854 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 04:33:00 PM
1080 Views
Re: 2 things
- 07/08/2011 05:48:26 PM
906 Views
My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:00:28 PM
963 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:37:58 PM
881 Views
Re: My best guess
- 07/08/2011 06:47:26 PM
1031 Views
