colby@bu-bio.bu.edu (Chris Colby) (04/22/91)
In article <47604@ut-emx.uucp> bill@ut-emx.uucp (Bill Jefferys) writes: >In article <79798@bu.edu.bu.edu> colby@bu-bio.UUCP (Chris Colby) writes: >#In article <47570@ut-emx.uucp> bill@ut-emx.uucp (Bill Jefferys) writes: ># Remember that evolution is _defined_ as a change in the >#gene pool; therefore non-genetic evolution is by definition non- >#sensical. >Well, Darwin would not have understood this definition of >evolution, as the concepts "gene" and "gene pool" postdate >him by a considerable time. For Darwin, evolution meant >"descent with modification." You may decide for yourself >whether this applies to the wasp example. The words "gene" and "gene pool" do indeed postdate Darwin, but the idea of a separate germ and soma do not. Darwin made this critical insight in "Origin". The rest of his "genetics" in the book are off base (he thought inheritance might be blending and later came to believe in use and disuse of traits as a basis of change (Lamarck's inheritance of acquired charactoristics). >Bill Jefferys Chris Colby email: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu