Big Fish Games Hacken

bottleneck "Extended phenotype"


you can not read any of my other books, but this read is essential - an injunction refers to reading "extended phenotype" by Richard Dawkins on the back cover said a few words before the volume. A jam that you do not have a finite dawkinsiarz me was to read the oxen pull. And the fact that the whole thing is addressed primarily to Dawkins colleagues, not only did not discourage me, but even further mobilized by heating unhealthy ambition. Well, I say what? I'm not that kind of stretch of the expected utility of cognitive lekturki? If not me, then who?
Well, I gave up and let the reading hopeless. Thanks be to God Urojonemu, not a happy coincidence that he came up with "extended phenotype" as Dawkins's first book, which I have read! Nothing in the world I would not tell you at that time that "The Selfish Gene" or "unweaving rainbow" is interesting stuff! Give you peace of mind, as I umęczył I was at Oxford biologist, in his (by no means popular) scientific incarnation. Too much of the volume of text discussing with like-minded specami świergotka the Y chromosomes of meadow and other abominations, discussing with them on that level of expertise rozkminy that the ability of reading comprehension man not of this sect, though he tried to focus on power and must run to ruin, sooner or later. In my case, unfortunately, usually it was before.

toil for wages reading stubborn as a mule reader, which reads constantly, though long ago does not understand anything the last few chapters of the book brings, finally, as a cognitive benefit. It was there that Dawkins serves as "a layman Friendly " his theory of the extended phenotype of the title. In short, this goes Dawkinsu is that the phenotypic consequences of genotypic interactions back / can extend far beyond the borders of individual body, who is a "cover" (or, as the poetic industral-recognized author, machine replicators propagation), this particular genotype. In other words, the gene not only may "squeeze" eye color, coat color or other phenotypic characteristics of their own body, can also determine the behavior of certain of the body, resulting in the reorganization of the living environment (a good example of the beaver and its dam), and even affect the characteristics of effective tudziez phenotypic behavior of other organisms. Examples of such extension of the battlefield to a higher value Replication gives Dawkins a few, and każden more interesting than others. That, say, flukes, parasitic on the cochlea and forcing replication for their own interest (contrary to the interests of the cochlea counterpart) increasing the thickness of snail shells. Or scuds infected larvae kolcogłowa that behave not as implied by the interest of the vector, but on the contrary, that is contrary to their interests to the interests of the parasite. Or male mice (or maybe a rat? "I do not remember, sorry) that through appropriate pheromone act on the pregnant females in a way that make them a miscarriage. Or, finally, the influenza virus, which - quite possibly - forcing me to sneeze with your own promotion. Well, a lot of this is to trace, and the conclusion of the whole thing might look like this:

genes affect the proteins, which in turn affect the X, which affects the Y, which affects the Z, which ... affects us an interesting phenotypic cehcę. But in traditional genetics of X, Y and Z must be closed within the body of the individual. Rozszezrona genetics recognizes the arbitrariness of this decision and follows the X, Y, Z, and when their effects go from one body to another. (P. 292) Dawkins

news so bad mish-mash, a total mix of compounds the sum of the existing relationship between genotype and the amount of phenotypic effects in the form of bodies and behaviors of all kinds of living organisms. According to traditional genetics of this association is much simpler and limited to the entailment relationship between genotype and phenotype X X Dawkins sees the arbitrariness here, and, above it, constructs a very complex network of relationships between genes and bodies / behaviors. I think - he writes - that almost every feature bears the traces of a compromise phenotype interaction between internal and external replicators . (P. 310)

(...) defending the doctrine of the extended phenotype of the replicator, I was trying to undermine confidence in the reader to the view which views the body as a unit of relating the benefits of the adaptations . (P. 311) And in another mania: I have a feeling that the very concept of the extended phenotype was possible to articulate only through the rejection of this perspective, which is an organism / individual is the primary beneficiary of natural selection. How here and there, you know, old-fashioned view fights Dawkins the evolutionary importance of individual prymarne even more fiercely than the Lord God. In any case, my personal confidence in the evolutionary "osobnikowizmu" effectively have been challenged when taking a "selfish gene", and "extended phenotype" gained the impression of distant consequences genocentrycznego coup on the basis of evolutionary biology. And that is why reading this book is, after all, however, was a good gadget. Although the version of the popular science really could be close to one fifth of total volume.