4 ms·

It's amazing that it only takes centuries. Under natural selection, species traits stay relatively stable for thousands or even millions of years. I suppose t

by rectang 7mo ago

It's amazing that it only takes centuries. Under natural selection, species traits stay relatively stable for thousands or even millions of years. I suppose that means natural selection tends to have more of a pronounced effect when there has been a severe environmental change that wipes out a large fraction of the population and leaves behind only those with adaptive mutations. Otherwise, the adaptive mutation stays in the population but doesn't proliferate excessively. Selective breeding can then be interpreted as an extreme version of environmental stress. I had previously imagined that evolution was a slow process but it seems that its more of a punctuated equilibrium, where when changes occur they occur quickly. (Caveat: not a biologist, just a layperson speculating and learning.)

culi 7mo ago
It doesn't "take" centuries, it's just been going on for centuries. You can probably develop a very unique cultivar in a single lifetime. This is quite common in the horticultural industry and is especially feasible with weedy species like Brassicas And the stability of the traits is mostly due to careful management. Most of these vegetables will very easily hybridize In the Andes there are still traditional farmers that maintain over 300 varieties of potatoes. Each one has a name and a history. Some are only ornamental, some are only eaten in soups, some are medicinal, some are a bright purple, some are extremely long, some look like giant pinecones. Just look at the incredible images in this article https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/29/how-perus-potato-museum-could-stave-off-world-food-crisis https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/29/how-peru...
like_any_other 7mo ago
I'm just glad this only applies to plants, and possibly animals, and not humans.
- rectang 7mo ago
  nervous laughter
- BigTTYGothGF 7mo ago
  The argument against eugenics is not "it doesn't work even in theory."
  - like_any_other 7mo ago
    You think it maybe applies to more than just eugenics? Perhaps to the dogma that we are all the same?
    - rectang 7mo ago
      In fact, punctuated equilibrium is quite compatible with what you describe as "the dogma that we are all the same". Punctuated equilibrium theory was proposed in the early 1970s by Stephen Jay Gould, who also wrote The Mismeasure of Man, a critique of biological determinism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium
      - like_any_other 7mo ago
        Yet punctuated equilibrium does not apply to cabbage, dog breeds, wolf varieties, and countless others. There are 37 subspecies of wolf, 10 of brown bear (yes, only brown bear. Other bears have their own subspecies each), and 47 red fox subspecies. Man alone is the great exception, unaffected by geographical separation and restricted gene flows. > biological determinism That term itself is a strawman - the argument is not that biology and genes fully determine behavior and life outcomes, merely that they affect it. As an aside, not only was Mismeasure of Man debunked (the skull measurements were not biased [1,2]), attacking craniometry in the era of genetics is like attacking alchemy. He should spend his time attacking PCA plots of the human genetic distribution [3]. Of course he does not, because he would prefer people remained ignorant of that. It's sad that 166 years after On the Origin of Species, we still haven't accepted that we are not immune to natural selection. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man#Reassessing_Morton's_skull_measurements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man#Reassess... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html [3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Principal_component_analysis_of_human_genetic_diversity https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Principal_compon...

by rectang 7mo ago

culi 7mo ago

It doesn't "take" centuries, it's just been going on for centuries. You can probably develop a very unique cultivar in a single lifetime. This is quite common in the horticultural industry and is especially feasible with weedy species like Brassicas And the stability of the traits is mostly due to careful management. Most of these vegetables will very easily hybridize In the Andes there are still traditional farmers that maintain over 300 varieties of potatoes. Each one has a name and a history. Some are only ornamental, some are only eaten in soups, some are medicinal, some are a bright purple, some are extremely long, some look like giant pinecones. Just look at the incredible images in this article https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/29/how-perus-potato-museum-could-stave-off-world-food-crisis https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/nov/29/how-peru...

like_any_other 7mo ago

I'm just glad this only applies to plants, and possibly animals, and not humans.

rectang 7mo ago
nervous laughter
BigTTYGothGF 7mo ago
The argument against eugenics is not "it doesn't work even in theory."
- like_any_other 7mo ago
  You think it maybe applies to more than just eugenics? Perhaps to the dogma that we are all the same?
  - rectang 7mo ago
    In fact, punctuated equilibrium is quite compatible with what you describe as "the dogma that we are all the same". Punctuated equilibrium theory was proposed in the early 1970s by Stephen Jay Gould, who also wrote The Mismeasure of Man, a critique of biological determinism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium
    - like_any_other 7mo ago
      Yet punctuated equilibrium does not apply to cabbage, dog breeds, wolf varieties, and countless others. There are 37 subspecies of wolf, 10 of brown bear (yes, only brown bear. Other bears have their own subspecies each), and 47 red fox subspecies. Man alone is the great exception, unaffected by geographical separation and restricted gene flows. > biological determinism That term itself is a strawman - the argument is not that biology and genes fully determine behavior and life outcomes, merely that they affect it. As an aside, not only was Mismeasure of Man debunked (the skull measurements were not biased [1,2]), attacking craniometry in the era of genetics is like attacking alchemy. He should spend his time attacking PCA plots of the human genetic distribution [3]. Of course he does not, because he would prefer people remained ignorant of that. It's sad that 166 years after On the Origin of Species, we still haven't accepted that we are not immune to natural selection. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man#Reassessing_Morton's_skull_measurements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man#Reassess... [2] https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html [3] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Principal_component_analysis_of_human_genetic_diversity https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Principal_compon...