3 ms·
Culture wars aside, the premise seems reasonable though, doesn't it? Intraspecies reproductive fitness is orthogonal to species success and there are clearly so
by crpearce 8y ago
Culture wars aside, the premise seems reasonable though, doesn't it? Intraspecies reproductive fitness is orthogonal to species success and there are clearly some examples (e.g. brightly colored plumage) where a trait that improves individual reproductive success is a net negative for the species.
- quotemstr 8y agoTraits don't evolve in isolation though: the need for costly signaling may very well select for increased generalized fitness as a way to "pay" for the signaling. Bright plumage can advertise "Look at me! I'm fast enough to look this amazing and not get eaten!" For this strategy to work, you need to actually be fast.
- hokumguru 8y agoIs it a net negative though? I would in fact wager the opposite. The tradeoff must be beneficial else natural selection would have culled them from the population. I believe in this specific case, it is likely more difficult for males to attract females than avoid predators.
- klmr 8y agoTo start off, yes, the trait needs to provide a reproductive fitness benefit. The problem is runaway sexual selection [1]. The textbook example of that being the peacock plumage, which is subject to strong sexual selection, yet is a detriment to overall fitness (see link for more details). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisherian_runaway#Peacocks_and_sexual_dimorphism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisherian_runaway#Peacocks_and...
- posterboy 8y agoPlumage is mimicri and so on. The eye like patterns can scare and emulate size. The e tail does fiegn size and does not fall into the general visual bird pattern.