The 'genetics of sand' may shed new light on evolutionary process over millions of years. An evolutionary ecologist at the University of Southampton, is using 'grains of sand' to understand more about the process of evolution. Dr Thomas Ezard is using the fossils of microscopic aquatic creatures called planktonic foraminifera, often less than a millimetre in size, which can be found in all of the world's oceans. The remains of their shells now resemble grains of sand to the naked eye and date back hundreds of millions of years. A new paper by Dr Ezard, published today (9 August 2013) in the journal Methods in Ecology & Evolution, opens the debate on the best way to understand how new species come into existence (speciation).
The debate concerns whether fossil records such as those of the planktonic foraminifera, contain useful evidence of speciation over and above the molecular study of evolution. "The controversial hypothesis we test is that the processes leading to a new species coming into existence provoke a short, sharp burst of rapid genetic change.
Mission. Understanding Evolution. Evolution: Education and Outreach | Full text | Correcting Some Common Misrepresentations of Evolution in Textbooks and the Media. Do not personify natural selection Natural selection is not an entity like Cher, Lady Gaga, or the Statue of Liberty, and it is not a force like wind. It is more correctly characterized as a description of a mechanism of differential survival of individuals in a lineage, rather than the cause itself. In his later years, Darwin regretted using the term in a causal sense, rather than sticking with the more forthright ‘struggle for existence’. Natural selection, personified as a force that acts on organisms, becomes little more than a rhetorical equivalent of a Deity when placed in sentences such as ‘Natural selection would favor the acquisition of such-and-such a feature’.
Substitute ‘God’ or ‘elves’ for ‘natural selection’ and the emptiness of this rhetoric becomes clear, even though, with evidence, the statement about what was favored could be supported (Figure 9). Figure 9. How better to phrase this? Natural selection is not ‘creative’ Avoid ‘evolved for’ Consider the larger picture. Evolution myths: Evolution is not predictive - life - 16 April 2008.
Macroevolution. Evolution is Not Just a Theory: home.
Evidence. Genetics. Explanations. TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy. Observation. Macroevolution. Darwin's Evidence for Evolution.