[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Killietalk] Tank fish in the wild
>In a recent thread, wisely closed by the moderator, a particularly ill
>informed comment was made.
>"For such reasons many of our aquarium fish could probably never make it
>in the wild."
Could it be that we are still mucking our way through the Darwin vs Lamark view of evolution?
Well more than a century after science became convinced that aquired traits are not inherited (unless they are coincident with a change to the genes, which is extremely rare) some people still have a Lamarkian edge to their world view. I hear this even in conversations about humans.
Per Darwin (and Mendel): Seems to me that breeding fish in a tank could affect their genetic makeup by favoring those best adapted to survival in a tank. Let's say a species has fry whose mouth sizes run a certain range; That 30% can take bbs at hatching, 70% cannot. If breeders feed bbs as first food, I'd bet you'd see a gradual increase in mouth size at hatching for this species. Perhap 30-70 might drift to to 75-25 after many generations. Perhaps it's possible that having a larger mouth might be maladaptive in the wild..... but that doesn't seem likely.
Per Lamark: If fry survival from P1 to F1 and on is reasonably high, it's difficult to imagine that a population would evolve to being incompetent in the wild by merely being in a tank. That would imply that a species could aquire 'tank-ness' which is different from 'wild-ness' by somehow absorbing the essence of it's environment.
Just my take on all of this.
To join the AKA see http://www.aka.org/pages/join.html
Archives are at http://fins.actwin.com/killietalk/