Theoretical biology spans multiple disciplines and the unaccompanied term evolution is defined differently in each:
As such chemical evolution is different from time evolution in physics and many other systems in theoretical biology that "evolve". These do play a role in theoretical biology.
Also, what standard answer to evolution in the field of theoretical biology are you referring to?
I recall learning that an allele as a special[:species:] gene variant, is defined as such as being present in at least one percent of the population. That definition has broadened meanwhile. A definition that has broadened.
Point in case, I don't believe there to be an evolutionary master-framework to (yet) exist, along the lines of desires for a Theory of Everything in physics.
On the other hand, as soon as you cross the boundaries of biological evolution, like let's say in the most primitive of living, biological entities, you are bound to cross over to cultural evolution as well. ( I am no expert on the subject, there are probably other intermittent steps as well). Synergistic effects in the process of evolution may even be considered in Quorum Sensing's most favorite model: Vibrio fischeri.
A simple search on the subject instantly yielded me:
"Evolution of alkaline phosphatase in marine species of Vibrio". J Bacteriol....
In other words: molecular evolution, as being part of the many evolutiony research focuses.
The idea and gross effects of Darwinian evolution are often rather straightforward at first glance. All the little details, that have to be accounted for -with scientific rigor-, as science itself is evolving, are probably where the team-work starts, as do the discussion.
So the only fixture you can count on is team in science.
The introduction to the evolutionary topic at hand, that you would use in an abstract or introduction would depend on the scientific sub-discipline, and would likely already be readily available through peer-publication.
No comments:
Post a Comment