[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: "Red Queen" Hypothesis



> 
> I believe the "Red Queen" hypothesis also includes a corollary  
> to the effect that an individual doesn't actually have to  
> "outrun/outgun" a predator to succeed, but just has to be able  
> to beat out another individual (of the same species or another  
> one) that the predator will find satisfactory as a meal...

     I've always thought this was a good explanation for certain problems 
for certain transitional forms of prey animals in evolution, particularly 
involving the development of mimicry and camoflage.  Being perfectly 
camoflaged of colored to imitate a poisionaous species is all great, but 
what about an animal in the process of evolving such a defense?  Is looking 
just slightly like the environment or just slightly like a poisionaous animal 
enough to give the animal a selective advantage for survival, and thus 
prod the species's evolution further in that direction?  The corollary 
presented above seems to offer a solution for this.  If a predator's 
chances of overlooking a prey animal is just slightly greater than for a 
slightly less camoflaged member of the species, the chances of the 
protected animals genes being passed on are just that much greater.  Kind 
o like the joke about the two guys who run into a grizzly bear in the 
woods.  One guy starts putting on his running shoes and the other guy 
says, "are you crazy, you can't outrun that bear!" to which the other 
replies "I don't have to, I just have to outrun you."  
     I relaize this has next to nothing to do with dinosaurs, and least not 
directly.  I also strongly doubt this is an original argument.  
If anyone can provide me a reference for a paper exploring the subject, I 
would be appreciative.  
     
LN Jeff