Bio help =(

[Mo0o]

Ok the question is True or False: Natural selection evolves organisms towards a unique optimum. Explain why you chose the answer you did

To me both answers can be kind of correct, but are there any bio majors out there taht say one is more true than the other?

For true we can say that organisms are constantly evolving to provide the most efficient means of surviving within a certain environment and that final form is the optimum organism.

But can't i also say environments are always changing and thus organisms must constantly change to adapt to changing environments and thus there can't ever be an optimum species?


this is really stumping me and yes i've tried google and my textbook without avail.

Any help is appreciated! thanks

 

[MacBaine]

I would say true, for the reason that you specified. For false... that can be said, but it is always trying to make them optimum... not saying it ever gets there though. It's like you are always trying to get to the top of a hill, but it keeps getting taller.

 

[Mo0o]

hmm yeah that makes sense. always moving "towards" the question doesn't mention reaching the point. thanks

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

I'm not a Bio major but I would lean towards no, because many animals are successful from an evolutionary standpoint using different techniques; case in point, insect-eating birds vs bats.

 

[Amorphus]

you can defend either point, just do it and don't be a wussy man.

I would answer no, but I'm not going to tell you why.

 

[Mo0o]

but in a given species aren't they always evolving to try to be as efficient as possible?

 

[richardycc]

just say yes and kiss up to Darwin.

 

[BigPoppa]

To Raynor and Amorphus, would you care to explain how you answer yes or no on a TRUE/FALSE question?

 

[RaynorWolfcastle]

Originally posted by: BigPoppa
To Raynor and Amorphus, would you care to explain how you answer yes or no on a TRUE/FALSE question?

yes = true, no = false... Maybe you should use your formidable powers of deduction to read the rest of the reply to figure it out... At least you made a useful contribution to the thread, right?

 

[chowderhead]

Natural selection evolves organisms towards a unique optimum. Explain why you chose the answer you did


Evaluating the statement requires addressing perspective/timeframe. One also needs to examine selection on an organismal level versus on a macro evolutionary level. Natural selection, generally, requires many generations to have any effects on a given species. At any one specific point in time, selective pressures on an organism or species may be minimal. For example, within an environment, there can be many ecological or reproductive strategies that species can employ to produce fertile offspring into the next generation. These strategies (i.e. asexual reproduction or ecological strategies like parasitism) are more than adequate within that environment at that given time point. In the short term, adequate is enough for that one organism in terms of fitness because in the long term that animal is dead. The giraffe with the ten-foot neck that waits for the twenty-foot neck will be long dead before natural selection ?marches that species towards the optimum.? We should be careful not to assign natural selection with a goal or purpose such as optimization of species fitness. Though natural selection is by definition not neutral, it is also not an endgame. On a larger, macro level, selective pressures and environmental factors change over time. What may be adequate strategy at one time point and in one environment may not be in another. Those strategies that are successful at that time point will be selected for. Thus, natural selection is an ongoing, evolving process.

Cliff note version:
Short term ? no
Long term ? yes with caveat.