🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <29371@castle.ed.ac.uk>, rambaut@castle.ed.ac.uk (A E Ram aut) writes:
|> ronald@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Ronald A. Amundson) writes:
|> 
|> >I would like information, with citations if possible, of definitions
|> >of the term "evolution" as something like "changes in the genepool."
|> >The earliest one I know of is Dobzhansky (1937) _Genetics and the
|> >Origin of Species_.  He says "Since evolution is a change in the genetic
|> >composition of populations, ..."  (p. 11)
|> 
|> Would it not be more correct to define evolution in terms of phenotypic
|> change as it is the phenotype that most mechanisms of evolution (natural
|> selection, sexual selection  etc.) act upon.

No, this will not work.  For a change to count as evolutionary, it *must*
be inheritable, that is it must be genetic.  This is because non-heritable
changes are not propagated, and thus cannot be *accumulated* - which makes
the whole process rather meaningless.

Dobzhansky's definition is a good 'beginners' definition - that is one that
gives a good *simple* criterion.

For a more in depth discussion of this issue, I recommend Ernst Mayr's
"Towards a New Philosophy of Biology" (or some such title, I always have trouble
getting it right).

-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com