Jump to content

User:Azcolvin429/sandbox

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What to do with this? (pulled from Speciation)

[edit]

The effect of sexual reproduction on species formation

[edit]

It has been argued that the resolution of Darwin's first dilemma lies in the fact that out-crossing sexual reproduction has an intrinsic cost of rarity.[1][2][3][4][5] The cost of rarity arises as follows. If, on a resource gradient, a large number of separate species evolve, each exquisitely adapted to a very narrow band on that gradient, each species will, of necessity, consist of very few members. Finding a mate under these circumstances may present difficulties when many of the individuals in the neighborhood belong to other species. Under these circumstances, if any species’ population size happens, by chance, to increase (at the expense of one or other of its neighboring species, if the environment is saturated), this will immediately make it easier for its members to find sexual partners. The members of the neighboring species, whose population sizes have decreased, experience greater difficulty in finding mates, and therefore form pairs less frequently than the larger species. This has a snowball effect, with large species growing at the expense of the smaller, rarer species, eventually driving them to extinction. Eventually, only a few species remain, each distinctly different from the other.[1][2][4] The cost of rarity not only involves the costs of failure to find a mate, but also indirect costs such as the cost of communication in seeking out a partner at low population densities.

African pygmy kingfisher, showing coloration shared by all adults of that species to a high degree of fidelity.[6]

Rarity brings with it other costs. Rare and unusual features are very seldom advantageous. In most instances, they indicate a (non-silent) mutation, which is almost certain to be deleterious. It therefore behooves sexual creatures to avoid mates sporting rare or unusual features.[7][8] Sexual populations therefore rapidly shed rare or peripheral phenotypic features, thus canalizing the entire external appearance, as illustrated in the accompanying illustration of the African pygmy kingfisher, Ispidina picta. This remarkable uniformity of all the adult members of a sexual species has stimulated the proliferation of field guides on birds, mammals, reptiles, insects, and many other taxa, in which a species can be described with a single illustration (or two, in the case of sexual dimorphism). Once a population has become as homogeneous in appearance as is typical of most species (and is illustrated in the photograph of the African pygmy kingfisher), its members will avoid mating with members of other populations that look different from themselves.[9] Thus, the avoidance of mates displaying rare and unusual phenotypic features inevitably leads to reproductive isolation, one of the hallmarks of speciation.[10][11][12][13]

In the contrasting case of organisms that reproduce asexually, there is no cost of rarity; consequently, there are only benefits to fine-scale adaptation. Thus, asexual organisms very frequently show the continuous variation in form (often in many different directions) that Darwin expected evolution to produce, making their classification into "species" (more correctly, morphospecies) very difficult.[1][7][8][14][15][16]

  1. ^ a b c Cite error: The named reference Bernstein85 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ a b Hopf, Frederic A.; Hopf, F. W. (February 1985). "The role of the Allee effect in species packing". Theoretical Population Biology. 27 (1). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier: 27–50. doi:10.1016/0040-5809(85)90014-0. ISSN 0040-5809.
  3. ^ Bernstein & Bernstein 1991
  4. ^ a b Michod 1995
  5. ^ Michod 1999
  6. ^ Hockey, Dean & Ryan 2005, pp. 176, 193
  7. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference Koeslag, 1990 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  8. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference Koeslag, 1995 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  9. ^ Cite error: The named reference Unnikrishnan was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  10. ^ Cite error: The named reference tutorial online was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  11. ^ Cite error: The named reference Maynard was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  12. ^ Mayr 1988
  13. ^ Williams 1992, p. 118
  14. ^ Maynard Smith, John (December 1983). "The Genetics of Stasis and Punctuation". Annual Review of Genetics. 17. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews: 11–25. doi:10.1146/annurev.ge.17.120183.000303. ISSN 0066-4197. PMID 6364957.
  15. ^ Clapham, Tutin & Warburg 1952
  16. ^ Grant 1971