tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post7533447705511343889..comments2023-10-26T17:50:34.134+00:00Comments on Fish Feet: Earth’s biodiversity is driven by more than just Survival of the FittestSarda Sahneyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15304436221452464387noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-64913968997418036762010-09-02T19:43:45.583+00:002010-09-02T19:43:45.583+00:00Related article in this week's Science:
Alroy...Related article in this week's Science:<br /><br />Alroy 2010: "The Shifting Balance of Diversity <br />Among Major Marine Animal Groups" p1191...<br /><br><br />StrangetrutherAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-71435943984773786602010-08-28T13:07:37.125+00:002010-08-28T13:07:37.125+00:00astrokid.nj - I think the point is that tetrapods ...astrokid.nj - I think the point is that <b>tetrapods</b> have only explored 1/3 of habitable ecological space. The other 2/3 is inhabited by non-tetrapoda.Dannynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-84356530259690743972010-08-28T10:34:21.155+00:002010-08-28T10:34:21.155+00:00I see nothing here that is really new or that hasn...I see nothing here that is really new or that hasn't been espoused by ecologists for the past 40 years. Ecologists often speak of the "ghost of competition past". Organisms that are most suited to their environment are best at AVOIDING competition. In fact, competitive displacement is a fundamental way that ecological niches are created and subsequently partitioned. Finding a correlation between biodiversity and the number of niches is also obvious and well known for the last 40 years or more since competition CAUSES organisms to shift in their niche space to avoid subsequent competition. Adaptive radiation could be considered nothing more than "fleeing from the constraints of competitive niche spaces. The rest is nothing but semantic arguments and marketing ploys for the paper. Of course there is also INTRAspecific competition which is ALWAYS present given that individuals of the same species, barring cases of trophic dimorphism (e.g. mosquitoes) and developmental dimorphism (species that undergo metamorphosis), always are under fairly intense competition because they always occupy the same niche space. If anything, I would say this supports the already well-established literature on the topic but shows that it works for deep time as well. Of course, I don't understand how you can calculate that most of the ecological spaces of tetrapods had been explored. The (probably incorrect) assumptions that are buried in that are too numerous to count. For example it assumes that tetrapods are only in competition with other organisms that are tetrapods that have fossilizable parts. To use a contemporary equivalent--over 1/3rd of the food we grow for human consumption is eaten by insects and nematodes and yet we rarely consider nematodes to be a competitor for food. Needless to say bacteria and fungus are also excellent competitors for what we eat.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-71451139523902497662010-08-27T12:44:49.266+00:002010-08-27T12:44:49.266+00:00Hi Sarda.
Just to say I enjoyed reading about you...Hi Sarda.<br /><br />Just to say I enjoyed reading about your research, in spite of the fact that I only really got here because of all the sadly manufactured hype surrounding the 'Darwin was wrong' thing.<br /><br />I really hope nothing I ever do ends up being so misrepresented!<br /><br />From an ex-Bristol palaeo person I wish you all the best in your PhD and hope you are spared too much spam as a result of this.Richard Dhttp://aproposofverylittle.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-19423548915832128492010-08-27T03:24:07.303+00:002010-08-27T03:24:07.303+00:00Hello everybody,
Thank you for your comments, unf...Hello everybody,<br /><br />Thank you for your comments, unfortunately I have had hundreds of spam emails, about 20 spam for every genuine comment, so I am slow in replying. I will do my best to moderate them and respond as soon as I can.<br /><br />Thanks, SardaSarda Sahneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15304436221452464387noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-83016405099258940052010-08-27T00:48:20.543+00:002010-08-27T00:48:20.543+00:00I am so glad I stumbled across this. I have a few ...I am so glad I stumbled across this. I have a few arguments against it and they may only be based in semantics. In general I find this, upon first inspection, a logical and accesible explanation the process of new species evolution. I was taught that evolutionarily speaking, species remained relatively stable for long periods of time with sudden drastic changes occurring to rapidly develop new species. However, no explanations gave me a sense that it was well-understood just how and why that occurs. This brings me a little closer to understanding. For that, I thank you. Also, as a teacher, I love it when our academics feel it necessary to make their findings accessible to the lay person - it is a great help to educators!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-51291197576351059372010-08-27T00:27:36.672+00:002010-08-27T00:27:36.672+00:00Please.....address Jerry Coyne's question.Please.....address Jerry Coyne's question.William Tookehttp://darwingoestothemovies.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-9607189429474717712010-08-26T23:55:37.957+00:002010-08-26T23:55:37.957+00:00THANK-YOU SARDA FOR YOUR CREATIVE THINKING AND OPE...THANK-YOU SARDA FOR YOUR CREATIVE THINKING AND OPENING UP A DISUCSSION THAT'S OFTEN VERY LIMTED.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-83652486825954637072010-08-26T23:27:40.996+00:002010-08-26T23:27:40.996+00:00Agreed!
Read Stephen Gould.
Evolution is not solel...Agreed!<br />Read Stephen Gould.<br />Evolution is not solely 'up', but 'in all directions at once'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-79414429346486714822010-08-26T23:26:17.581+00:002010-08-26T23:26:17.581+00:00I agree completely.
Read Stephen Gould.
Evolution ...I agree completely.<br />Read Stephen Gould.<br />Evolution is not solely 'up', but in 'all directions at once'.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-87932099551044551592010-08-26T22:31:15.039+00:002010-08-26T22:31:15.039+00:00What really surprises me is how often people misun...What really surprises me is how often people misunderstand evolution and in so doing claim that it is not correct. Evolution by natural selection (Darwin's complete thought) is about advantage, not competition. So if a trait offers an advantage, the species will survive better. Entering a new niche is about adaptation and the species that does it first has the advantage of being able to exploit something no other species has. Competition is the wrong way to approach evolution, it is about advantage, which does not necessarily imply competition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-2982632235556362032010-08-26T21:40:27.815+00:002010-08-26T21:40:27.815+00:00You have to compete in order to obtain more space....You have to compete in order to obtain more space.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00160379795062931613noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-78263411097631728552010-08-26T16:29:31.433+00:002010-08-26T16:29:31.433+00:00"Competition did not play a big role in the o..."Competition did not play a big role in the overall pattern of evolution. For example, even though mammals lived beside dinosaurs for 60 million years, they were not able to out compete the dominant reptiles."<br /><br />There seems to be a glaring contradiction between these two adjacent sentences. <br /><br />Surely occupying empty niches is a strategy for escaping competition in saturated ones.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-66935479437099144392010-08-26T13:46:53.752+00:002010-08-26T13:46:53.752+00:00What a pity your conclusions got lost in the "...What a pity your conclusions got lost in the "darwin was wrong" hype surrounding your work.marcashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11489159979240418917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-51153473480929265492010-08-26T04:31:55.954+00:002010-08-26T04:31:55.954+00:00Our research shows that tetrapods (amphibians, rep...Our research shows that tetrapods (amphibians, reptiles, mammals and birds) have explored only <b>one third</b> of habitable ecological space<br /><br /><br />Can you give examples of what remains habitable but unexplored? Definetely not the deserts, nor the oceans I would assume..astrokid.njnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-13794148384782697862010-08-26T04:15:23.309+00:002010-08-26T04:15:23.309+00:00The "competition" element in the particu...The "competition" element in the particular conventional (and, unfortunately, historically most popular) interpretation of Darwin's treatise has always struck me as an over-interpretation, to say the least.<br /><br />Competition with WHAT? As if some presumed 'opponent' was involved. Worse, as if individual creatures somehow understand not only who their opponent antagonists, foes and enemies are, but actively address the "competition" with some strategy for overcoming them. <br /><br />Organisms who are purported to 'covet' their lives and genetic progeny (not to mention their potential lebensraum - "living room" aka 'environmental niches' - a convenient misidentification with the notion of territoriality) are immediately subsumed into an ideological stance that tells us more about how humans steeped in their cultural upbringings are so capable of jumping to unfounded conclusions.<br /><br />Alas, in most human cultures, nature or the 'environment' has itself acquired the role of 'opponent': a thing which organisms seek to 'fight against' or which higher beings such as we ever and again pretend to 'conquer'.<br /><br />The 'moral' of this horror state of affairs is: WE DO NOT GET IT. (By "WE" I mean the vast and astonishingly undereducated majority, of which a major proportion is so immediately persuaded by irrational promises from the religious contingent which provides 'validation' through the empty constriction of popularity: if one encounters lots of people who think a particular thing, why, it MUST be true...etc)<br /><br />On your final bold-faced statement in particular: Indeed, and it is quite as simple as that.<br /><br />Nothing that a bold planet-wide reduction in the grotesque overpopulation couldn’t conceivably address, I’m sure. Of course, any such movement would inevitably trigger a precipitous increase in the whining of those who imagine that our excessive population is an indicator of how ‘successful’ we are as a species.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-22187398670371487832010-08-26T03:46:30.088+00:002010-08-26T03:46:30.088+00:00I am not arguing against your analysis but my unde...I am not arguing against your analysis but my understanding is that for Darwin the major component of competition really meant reproductive competition between individuals <i>within </i> a species. <br /><br />I think some of the media reports (including the BBC link you gave) are conflating Darwin's idea of competition and your analysis which focuses on competition <i>between</i> groups or species.Suvrat Kherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18281172632784780810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-90354459690636534702010-08-25T23:28:14.229+00:002010-08-25T23:28:14.229+00:00Well, this is much more helpful to the lay reader ...Well, this is much more helpful to the lay reader than what has appeared in the popular press, and I for one appreciate that you have clarified your team's results.<br /><br />Thanks!Mike Haubrichhttp://quichemoraine.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-24036333149353008092010-08-25T21:14:46.895+00:002010-08-25T21:14:46.895+00:00The phrase "survival of the fittest" was...The phrase "survival of the fittest" was coined by Herbert Spencer, not Charles Darwin.<br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-51858610909034656912010-08-25T19:48:09.256+00:002010-08-25T19:48:09.256+00:00Hhmm, I would have considered "radiating into...Hhmm, I would have considered "radiating into empty niches" a form of competition. After all, if there's a free source of calories and some individuals are in a better position to capitalize on it (or have lower mutational hurdles to overcome in capitalizing on it), then we have organisms selected based on their ability to capitalize on a (particular) new source of calories.<br /><br />In other words, I simply don't see how this study in any way decentralizes or mediates or lessens the influence of selection on evolution, unless it does so simply by playing silly semantic games. We can leave that to Jerry Fodor, don't you think?<br /><br />Dan L.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-19250120462244438662010-08-25T18:41:26.314+00:002010-08-25T18:41:26.314+00:00Maybe this is the wrong place to ask, but is there...Maybe this is the wrong place to ask, but is there any evidence, fossil or otherwise, that the cataclysmic event that brought about the extinction of the dinosaurs also impacted extant mammalian taxonomy?caynazzohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11263280738905977688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-89974725310124314322010-08-25T18:26:07.299+00:002010-08-25T18:26:07.299+00:00Why did the reporters all dwell on the fact that y...Why did the reporters all dwell on the fact that your results showed that "Darwin was wrong"? You guys didn't sell your paper that way, did you? Otherwise I fail to understand how all the reporters hit on the same hook.Jerry Coynehttp://www.whyevolutionistrue.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-45180407479494508532010-08-25T18:02:12.684+00:002010-08-25T18:02:12.684+00:00Well, PZ Myers has just linked to you (which is ho...Well, PZ Myers has just linked to you (which is how I came here) so hopefully you will gain a few new readers out of that horde now that you are blogging again. I am happy to be here and am certainly going to be coming back.<br /><br />Your paper is certainly getting a lot of press coverage. Nothing I have done has ever generated this much buzz. Exciting!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10865152636261134559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-20094680820395719132010-08-25T17:43:22.312+00:002010-08-25T17:43:22.312+00:00FWIW Herbert Spencer is usually attributed with th...FWIW Herbert Spencer is usually attributed with the coinage of "Survival of the Fittest" after reading the first edition of Origin of the Species. Darwin liked the phrase and included it in later editions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6868618319990879375.post-28173826645847444092010-08-25T09:43:01.994+00:002010-08-25T09:43:01.994+00:00Very interesting post, your study is fascinating, ...Very interesting post, your study is fascinating, although I don't know of any evolutionary mechanism which could facilitate this kind of diversification. The study is perhaps more concerned with highlighting the importance of habitat then with re-writing evolutionary theory? But the implications to evolutionary theory seem unavoidable and, in the view of some, detrimental.James Georgenoreply@blogger.com