Arrival of the frequent is nutrient-dependent
March 18, 2014 | James Kohl
Feb 07, 2014 by Harry Dayantis
Excerpt: “…parallels between evolutionary dynamics and processes in the everyday physical world. In my group we have worked for many years on self-assembly; how individual units can form well-defined composite objects without any external control.”
My comment: Structures are nutrient-dependent; functions are pheromone-controlled, which helps to explain why ecological adaptations are biophysically constrained in species from microbes to man. Conserved molecular mechanisms of structure and function make mutation-driven evolution biologically impossible, which is why natural selection is now claimed to play a lesser role (e.g., that role was never ecologically validated).
Theorists will soon realize that species diversity arises from Darwin’s ‘conditions of life’ not from mutation-initiated natural selection, but obviously from ecological variation and adaptations.
Excerpt: When Hugo de Vries was advocating for the importance of mutations in evolution, he famously said “Natural selection may explain the survival of the fittest, but it cannot explain the arrival of the fittest” . Here we argue that the fittest may never arrive. Instead evolutionary dynamics can be dominated by the “arrival of the frequent”.
Excerpt:”… we will not consider geographical and ecological factors because of space limitation. Our primary purpose is to clarify the roles of mutation and selection in the evolution of reproductive isolation…”
My comment: “arrival of the frequent” is nutrient-dependent, which explains why no experimental evidence suggests that evolution is mutation-driven. All experimental evidence has consistently proved that ecological variation results in ecological adaptations via conserved molecular mechanisms of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled reproduction, which are manifested in species diversity.