Because of limited resources, species who own favorable traits would have an advantage over those who do not have them, and would be more likely to survive and reproduce. Thomas Malthus established the belief that all growing populations will struggle because scarcity of resources will always be an issue. Since more offspring’s are produced than resources allow, individuals will end up competing for resources which fits in with Darwin's theory of natural selection. With the inspirations and ideas of Thomas Malthus, Charles Darwin was able to come up with the theory of natural selection. 2.
Hard to believe as it may be, these seemingly maladaptive traits can prove to be very useful to certain members of many different species as shown by Darwin’s Theory of Sexual Selection. They enhance the ability of the individual to obtain mates and are therefore very important in the reproductive and evolutionary success of many animals. It is first necessary to understand the basics of Natural Selection before being able to show how Sexual Selection leads to extravagant traits. The main idea behind natural selection is that living organisms change and adapt in order to enhance their ability to survive and reproduce. Those animals that adapt will be more likely to survive and produce more offspring than other animals in the same environment that do not (Boyd and Silk 2000, p. 5), as maintained by Darwin’s second postulate.
Natural selection is an important component of evolution. Natural selection occurs when some members of a population are better fit for survival and reproduction than the others in that population (Phelan 284-85, 2011). The environment in which organisms live plays a part in natural selection as well. Depending on the conditions of the environment, the organisms may pass down selected traits to their offspring. These selected traits will allow for the next generation to better adapt and survive longer.
4) Those individuals that possess some characteristic that are useful in adapting the environment increase their chances of survival, and produce more offspring with the favorable characteristic and pass them to the next generations. Due to the variations in characteristic and physical changes, the new individual will eventually become so distinct that they will constitute different specie. Sexual competition is an important aspect that "depends, not on a struggle for existence, but on a struggle between the males for the possession of the females ". It does not affect the death of the recessive individual, but it results in fewer or no offspring for that male. Victory depends on special traits.
Instead, as one can see in the data above and attached in the packet, any group, large or small, has the advantage of not going extinct as long as they have a higher fertility rate than another competing group. After giving this some thought, I have found that this makes a lot of sense and can be backed up by the reading regarding Darwin’s finches. In the newer study of his finches, they have found that those who were able to survive drastic changes and continued to reproduce were the ones who evolved to keep their species alive for longer. The next sub-experiment had required another hypothesis: if the size of the difference in fertility is slightly higher, then that will become more apparent overtime. This hypothesis can be proven true my referring to the tables that I have listed above.
We were able to spot 135 species of birds during our stay and also learned about a few mutualism relationships. One of the greatest mutualism relationships is between the ants and the bullhorn acacias. The ants live in the hollow bullhorns and protect the tree, making sure there is no vegetation to harm it. In return, the acacia creates nectar and Beltian bodies, the yellow tips of the leaves and rich in protein, for the ants to eat and prosper. It is quite possible for both parties to live separately; however, the ants and the acacias thrive when they are together.
When we look at the life history variations across Primates, unlike other Primates humans have a longer period of infant dependency, human infants, in natural fertility societies, are weaned far earlier than any of the great apes: chimps and orangutans wean, on average, at about 5 and 7.7 years, respectively, while humans wean, on average, at about 2.5 years. It is argued here that the neurological basis for human intellectual ability cannot be sustained much beyond one year by a human mother’s milk alone, and thus early weaning, when accompanied by supplementation with more nutritious adult foods, is vital to the ontogeny of our larger brain. • Life History Variation in Primates, Paul H. Harvey and T. H. Clutton-Brock, Evolution, Vol. 39, No. 3 (May, 1985), pp.
This was what Darwin called “natural selection” or “survival of the fittest.” According to the theory, those individuals with slightly better adaptations would get more food, be healthier, live longer and, most importantly, have more mates. As time progressed, traits would become more obvious; therefore later generations would be ...
.." In some cases this modification can be a detriment to a species. Take for example a species of like-moths in England preceding and during the Industrial Revolution. Before the manufacture of goods in large quantities, two types of moths, white and gray would rest on the bark of trees where birds would prey upon them. The barks of trees were mainly white, which helped the white moths immensely in that they were camouflaged from their predators. Conversely, the gray moths were clearly noticeable and were thus preyed upon heavily.
He made and wrote observations about coral reefs (1842), and volcanic islands (1844), but his greatest biological observations were those pertaining to his theory of evolution. Darwin's findings begin in the Galapagos Islands where he noticed a wide array of finches whose beaks were different sizes. He believed that the physical conditions on the island did not affect the birds' beaks, but it was the birds' feeding habits. For instance, the birds with the large, powerful beaks ate large seeds, while the birds with the small or fine beaks, ate small seeds or insects. He theorized that each bird was suited to its surroundings and was adapted to its environment, thus the birds best suited to the environment prevailed and reproduced, leaving those who did not adapt, extinct.