[Taxacom] SUSPECT Re: Molecules vs Morphology

[Richard Zander]

Let me expand a little. The environment _regulates_ to a significant extent, through selection on expressed traits, the genetic basis of expressed traits. The genome already has regulator genes and promotor sequences galore that act in much the same way. Thus, protein-coding traits plus regulation yeilds expressed traits. Just because the environment is not directly hereditable is beside the point. 
 
Regarding "genetic change through generations without any obvious change in morphology . . . yes that is evolution", this is a bit much. A lot of genetic change through generations is so minor it does not affect gene frequency (e.g. non-coding point mutations), a lot of change is minor adaption or microevolution that is not dealt with usually by phylogeneticists, and only sister-group splitting associated with macroevolution is of concern to phylogeneticists. So, no, genetic change over generations that is not associated with expressed traits ("morphology") is not necessarily evolution, and is _usually_ not evolution in the sense of evolution being that which is phylogramable. 
 
_______________________
Richard H. Zander
Missouri Botanical Garden
PO Box 299
St. Louis, MO 63166 U.S.A.
richard.zander at mobot.org
 

________________________________

From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu on behalf of Mario Blanco
Sent: Sun 8/16/2009 8:41 PM
To: TAXACOM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] SUSPECT Re: Molecules vs Morphology



Commonly accepted among biologists in general. That definition has
absolutely no conflict with morphological evolution. As I said, all
morphological evolution is determined by changes in the genetic makeup
through generations. I am myself more interested in the morphology, but
even paleontologists have to acknowledge the genetic basis of
morphological evolution. The reason that this definition does not
explicitly mention morphology is because you can have genetic change
through generations without any obvious change in morphology or
behavior. And yes, that is still evolution.