Species versus gene selection 英文参考文献.docVIP

Letter to the Editor Agricultural University of Athens, Department of Genetics, l!otanikos, 118.55 Athens Greece; and University of California at Irvine, Department of Ecology and Evolutionary 1Jiology, Irvine, CA 92717, USA Species selection has been recently promoted (Gould Eldredge, 1988a, 1988b) variability as in rates observed, both temporally and spatially, at the phenotypic level. This has rekindled the contention between microevolutionists (Maynard Smith, 1987, 1988) and macroevolutionists, which has existed since Darwin’s era. One of the main differences between micro (molecular) and macro (phenotypic) evolution, is the stasis stage possible for the latter, while the molecular evolution proceeds on as far as the lineage continues. Stabilizing selection (Charlesworth et al., 1982), proposed by microevolutionists to explain this, is countered by the proposal of species selection by macroevolutionists. Further complicating the matter, are the existing exceptions which weaken both concepts. As Gould Eldredge so imaginatively put it, dquo;Can we really hope to explain why the world holds more lingula, depnoi fishes, horse shoe crabs, dragonflies, orthoptera, tortoises, crocodiles, platypus, and bats remain in comparative evolutionary stasis, even though they live under variable environments, compete with other species and have such long existences? Is this the result of sampling or does a common denominator exist? The and the common characteristic is that their most sensitive stages are protected or less exposed to ultraviolet light and/or cosmic rays and consequently experience low mutation rates, especially chromosomal. Chromosomal aberrations have long been proposed as being responsible for speciation events (White, 1978), and then for macroevolution. However, it is necessary to clarify what less exposed means here: the limpets are less exposed by having a short larval stage and by the shielding of their shell; the depnoi fishes, by being