birding-aus

Backyard birdfeeders driving avian evolution

To: Andrew Bell <>
Subject: Backyard birdfeeders driving avian evolution
From: Michael Tarburton <>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 08:42:23 +1100
G'day All who are following this thread that Laurie so kindly brought to our attention.
Ok I said "almost always" because it is known in science (& hopefully  
common sense) that it is very hard in practical terms to exclude  
every possibility.  ie. to prove something all you have to do is show  
that it is true in one or more cases.  To disprove something you have  
to have investigated all cases - how do you know when you have  
achieved that?  In many situations you cant so you have to look at  
probabilities.
So can you come up with an example of an "occasional advantageous  
genetic mutation"?  If you cant then this aspect of evolutionary  
theory is baseless.
Going back to the original example of the Blackcap Sylvia atricapilla  
we can use Darwinian or neo-Darwinian selective theory to explain  
that those birds going to the UK instead of Spain would have an  
advantage in that they are better fed in winter and have less  
distance to return to their breeding grounds.  This means they arrive  
at the breeding grounds in better condition and earlier than the  
birds wintering in Spain. David Lack's research shows this probably  
gives them the choice of the best breeding sites and greater success  
in producing more offspring than those going to Spain.  In time they  
will (have?) outnumbered the other portion of their population.
I see no problem with that - and they probably can revert to the  
other form if conditions change back (but that varies between  
characters) but they are still blackcaps no new genes have been  
produced just an advantage to those whose genes allowed them to go to  
the UK instead of Spain.  This is similar to Biston betularia the  
Peppered Moth that was touted in Uni & high school text books ad  
nauseam as examples of evolution.  Problem is they are still Peppered  
Moths and they have started to revert to the lighter form and the  
evidence is that they started to do so before the UK started their  
clear air program.  Problem with that example is that much of the  
research has been shown to be faulty & fraudulent. [see Evolutionary  
Biology 30: 299-322. The Scientist 13(11):]  That has not stopped  
some text books still using it.
The examples of Darwin's finches is not too different. Now that good  
times have returned to the Galapagos Islands (at least for the  
finches) the heavy-billed birds have lost their advantage and are  
returning to the narrow-billed form.  This is not evidence for the  
development of new genes.  is is evidence that Darwin's selection  
pressures can select for certain genes under certain circumstances.   
Nothing new has been created.
So there is good evidence that the environment can selectively favour  
certain genes but I am still waiting for just one example of a new  
gene having evolved.
Cheers & happy thinking

Mike


===================
Michael Tarburton

===================




On 07/12/2009, at 11:52 PM, Andrew Bell wrote:

They key is in the statement "almost always" - ie not always. Although artificial selection often retains maladaptive characteristics through human interference, natural selection can be expected to eliminate most maladaptive mutations quite efficiently while selecting for the occasional advantageous one. This is the evolutionary process as generally understood. My understanding is that genetic material is not necessarily lost at all, expression of genes can be turned off and altered, only to be turned on again later in descended species - maybe by changes in bits of DNA we don't conventionally see as genes - it seems we are just beginning to understand a lot of this and the roll of the so called "junk DNA" - watch this space over the next ten years!. Genetic evolution is quite conservative, ie it used and re-uses the same genes, often in new and different ways. I
I don't know where the quote below comes from,  but I'm not sure  
why enhancing one characteristic "is likely to be at the expense of  
others" , one could just as easily write "is likely to benefit  
other characteristics". Evolution through the natural selection of  
novel mutations and rearrangements does indeed enhance the richness  
of  the information - hence the diversity of life birds to marvel  
at. Just wish they 'ld diverged a bit more at times when struggling  
to ID  those LBJs and waders!
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com

To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send the message: unsubscribe (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to: 
===============================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the birding-aus mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU