by alexwg on 1/26/17, 10:55 PM with 12 comments
by malgorithms on 1/28/17, 11:41 PM
Can someone with more bio expertise explain this theory to me? I've heard it said before, but it doesn't seem right to me. Some species disperse widely, and the offspring end up far from their parents, not really competing for resources. Wouldn't such species evolve quickly not to age, if possible? Similarly, wouldn't it be far better for non-migrating species not to age but instead evolve to migrate when old?
It seems intuitive to me that keeping an old body from falling apart takes great resources / evolutionary focus, and there are diminishing returns the further out the age. e.g.,., if a species were only 1% likely to make it to old age T in the wild, then it would be hard to select for traits that led to it being in good shape at that age.
by breck on 1/28/17, 8:05 PM
by pjdorrell on 1/28/17, 11:16 PM
by outlace on 1/29/17, 12:41 AM
by pizza on 1/29/17, 3:01 AM
(I can already hear the scorn)