Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Kevin_Uxbridge t1_ivf9ztk wrote

> That "genome cost" only exists when considering the individual.

A genome is the makeup of an individual, and can only be understood as such. Population genetics is the spread of genes but the mechanism, by necessity, acts on individuals with the genes. Your genes could be said to 'not care about you particularly' except as a vehicle for themselves, just as your genes in you don't give a crap about 'the species' except how it impacts your personal genome.

Not sure what you mean that evolution 'caters to the whole species'. Its effects can only be seen in these terms but the mechanism shapes the behavior of individuals to act on their own behalf. Sometimes this benefits the whole species, often it doesn't. That's just selection for you.

13

EmperorArthur t1_ivfe99l wrote

> A genome is the makeup of an individual, and can only be understood as such.

Nope. It's statistics that matter at the species level.

A recessive gene with madsive negative consequences will statistically become more and more rare, since at an individual level people who express it are more likely to not produce offspring.

However, if you then get a sudden change in environmental conditions which massively increases those people's survival chances or chances of increasing offspring, then the portion of the population with said gene is going to jump way up again.

8