快猫短视频

IS NATURE red in tooth and claw, a bleak battlefield where organisms struggle for existence, conniving and cheating their way to any advantage they can get? Most biologists would say yes, but in The Genial Gene, passionately argues the opposite. The world, she claims, is a kinder, gentler place marked by cooperation and mutual affection.

In particular, Roughgarden, an evolutionary biologist at Stanford University in California, takes issue with , the portion of evolutionary theory that seeks to explain why male peacocks have big, showy tails, why eggs are bigger than sperm, and why even 鈥渕onogamous鈥� birds鈥� nests often contain eggs fertilised by other males. According to sexual selection, these can all be explained by the evolutionary conflict between males and females over who gets to mate with whom and how much parenting each will do.

Roughgarden proposes replacing sexual selection with a controversial theory based on shared effort toward a common goal that she calls 鈥渟ocial selection鈥�. After all, she notes, the only way either parent can successfully rear its offspring is through some degree of cooperation. 鈥淭he male/female distinction was forged in cooperation, not battle,鈥� she writes.

鈥淩oughgarden proposes replacing sexual selection with a controversial theory she calls 鈥榮ocial selection鈥欌��

Roughgarden develops this new theory for several chapters, reframing classic examples of sexual selection. The size difference between sperm and eggs, for example, has been explained as a result of sperm 鈥渃heating鈥� by providing nothing but genes, thus forcing the egg to do the rest of the work. Instead, social selection centres on the sexes鈥� shared need to maximise the chances of sperm finding egg, while ensuring that the fertilised egg is adequately provisioned. Roughgarden and her students have shown mathematically that these conflicting needs can be met if one sex produces small, mobile sperm, and the other large, well-stocked eggs.

A similar case can be made to explain the division of labour between male and female birds as they tend their young. Standard theory sees each parent seeking to manipulate the other into doing more than its share. In contrast, Roughgarden uses concepts borrowed from the field of labour bargaining to show how the two can reach a mutually satisfactory solution that is better than if each merely tried to satisfy its own selfish interest. The new theory even suggests that the partners can evolve to consider each other鈥檚 interests 鈥� a feature Roughgarden is tempted to call 鈥渢he evolution of love鈥� 鈥� though the book gives little information about when this is likely to develop, or how often.

The Genial Gene is intended for a lay audience, so Roughgarden merely alludes to the mathematics involved; readers seeking more details will need to read her scientific papers, as well as the many critical rejoinders from other experts.

In the end, the book may leave readers with the sense that Roughgarden has overreacted: instead of seeing conflict everywhere in nature, she has swung to the opposite pole and only sees cooperation. Reality probably lies in between.

After all, most behavioural ecologists admit that it is sometimes in an individual鈥檚 best interest to cooperate with its neighbours and mates. And certainly all, probably even Roughgarden, would agree that there are times when competition is the order of the day. If the debate comes down to a question of how often and under what conditions, Roughgarden鈥檚 new theory is likely to end up an important extension to existing thought, and not a revolutionary departure from it. Appropriately, Roughgarden and her critics are likely to have more to gain from cooperation than from conflict.