PaddleWise by thread

From: Matt Broze <matt_at_marinerkayaks.com>
subject: RE: [Paddlewise] moquitos
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 00:24:49 -0700
Jim Tibensky asked:
>>>>Question:  How does the mosquito evolve to have the behavior of avoiding
a sound that precedes their death? <<<<

I'll take a stab at it. The mosquito doesn't have to know or learn anything
at all. If by some random chance mosquito F (for fittest) has developed a
strange genetic quirk, say it (for some genetic reason) flies a little more
erratically when it is in the presence of  pressure changes that happen to
be in roughly the frequency of  a dragonfly's wing beats. Say other
mosquitoes, with variations A to ZZZZZZZZ do not exhibit this behavior at
all. As a result of the F-quirk it becomes a little harder for the
dragonflies to catch Mosquito F (and half of her offspring too). Gradually
that gene for erratic flight becomes more prevalent in the whole population
of mosquitoes because more mosquitoes containing it have survived the
dragonfly encounters they were subjected to than their neighbors did and
lived on to successfully breed. Among those with the F gene, another
beneficial random variation might arise (among a thousand harmful mutations)
that gives that mosquito, and half its offspring, another slight advantage
(possibly against dragonflies or other predators but it could be anything).
Anything hereditary that is even a slight advantage will mean more and more
of the total population will eventually be a relative of the mosquito that
first had that advantage. Multiply this by thousands of minor advantages
over millions of years and eventually almost all the mosquito heredity lines
still reproducing will have those advantages.

Think of evolution not so much as the survival of the fittest but rather as
the trimming away of the ones not quit up to the challenges they faced. This
trimming away is what decides what will be later labeled as the fittest.
Everything alive is the offspring of the formerly "fittest". Nobody knows in
advance what the future environment will determine will be the next "most
fit" characteristics.

The theory of evolution is really based on a tautology. "That which is here
is what has survived this long". It can't help but be true. The plants,
animals and even minerals that are still here, out of all of the possible
variations that once were here or that possibly could have been here (but
never were because the lines that would have lead to them died out or
disappeared) are those that (for life) are in a continuous line of heredity
that has survived since the beginning of the chain (possibly the first thing
that could reproduce itself--but unlike minerals, not quite an always
perfect reproduction--came into being on earth). (Of course, the first
thousand times such a thing came in to being it might have not made it very
far before dying out and it is actually the 1001st such thing that is actual
the start of the present chains of life). Things that reproduce themselves
but not quite perfectly can't help but evolve some differences over time. If
they also can die the variations are kept in check and those forms that are
most successful at exploiting some niche will soon predominate in it.  It
looks like all it takes to be alive is a system of not quite perfect
reproduction and death.

Bob's remark "This is NOT the case in one species I'm familiar with!"
concerning the fittest being the ones that reproduce, puts the cart before
the horse.
 You can't judge the fittest in advance and no matter how repellent it might
seem to some, those who are reproducing the most are by definition the
fittest, at least for that generation.  A lot of the unfit, however, think
that they and their kind must surely be the fittest in the land (and can
probably point to all sorts of immaterial reasons why that is the case).
Their parents were the fittest, but if they don't reproduce they will not
have been the fittest, no matter what reasons they might bring up to argue
otherwise.

Matt Broze
www.marinerkayaks.com

***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************
From: Bob Denton <bdenton_at_soytek.com>
subject: RE: [Paddlewise] moquitos
Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2003 10:35:28 -0400
<<<Bob's remark "This is NOT the case in one species I'm familiar with!"
concerning the fittest being the ones that reproduce, puts the cart
before the horse.>>>

Actually, I was really thinking about the fact that our social system
and science has allowed members of our species with unsuccessful
mutations, to live long enough to reproduce and pass those mutations on
to other generations. I am thinking of most genetic illnesses, and even
poor eyesight. A predator with really bad eyesight is probably not going
to live long enough to reproduce.

This "anti evolutionary " behavior has been on-going since Neolithic
times.

Cu

Bob Denton


***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thu Aug 21 2025 - 16:33:34 PDT