Talk:Fisherian runaway

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Genetics, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to genetics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this page, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating.

==Needed changes==

This article could use a revision of my quick description of the mechanism, responses to Fisher's proposal of the mechanism, and citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.225.143.95 (talk • contribs) - 04:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

• Article lacks coherancy. The description doesn't make much sense to the layman. It needs to be rewritten. Also needs sources. I rewrote the intro a bit to try to summerize the text, but this ins not my forte and could use a lookover by an expert. --Lendorien 19:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The article needs to try to go into the "I'm such a fit peacock that I can survive and reproduce in spite of my outrageous predator-attention-attracting tail"-territory. Currently it sounds (at least in the intro) as if Fisherian selection is some kind of error. --Peter Knutsen 14:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Peter, I think you're confusing this with Zahavi's Handicap Principle, which is something else (I think the mentioning of the peacock's tail here is a poor and confusing choice for that reason. Runaway selection is a mechanism for exaggerating traits that usually arise as adaptations. Handicap principle explains traits that are sexy because they are maladaptive and thus can only be afforded by the truly fit (it's thus a mark of fitness that can't be faked). The peacock's tail may well have been shaped by both, so it's best here to mention an example shaped by just one. How about the antlers on the now-extinct Irish Elk? --Scott —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.111.8.97 (talk) 22:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Interesting...

Having read this article, I might be able to think of some instances of Fisherian runaway evolution in humans - for example, large breasts, large buttocks, a thin waist, and overall slimness in human females. Does anybody else think this is Fisherian evolution? --Luigifan (talk) 22:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, perhaps not. The traits I described don't exactly interfere with survival... sure, the slim frame might make it difficult to manage feats of strength, but adrenaline can overcome this weakness (like in the classic example of a woman lifting her car,) so it's negligible in terms of survival. I also suppose that large breasts might get in the way a bit, but that's probably insignificant (if anything, they would actually provide cushioning for the chest area.) Therefore, the... ahem... "guy-magnet" aspects of the female anatomy are probably not Fisherian evolution; they do not interfere with survival, so their evolutionary success is based solely on their value in attracting mates, without having to overcome detrimental effects on survival. --Luigifan (talk) 17:52, 19 January 2008 (UTC)