On June 9 I asked if this quotation from Niles Eldredge in an article by
Roberrt Augros reflected the true state of affairs concerning natural
selection:
<[Eldredge points to the many] "ecologists skeptical of the very
concept of the competition between species...who claim they simply cannot
see any evidence for such raw battling going on nowadays in nature."
Augros added, "But if universal competition between species and between
individuals is not
factual, then Darwin's argument for natural selection fails. Ecological
studies have also documented that species regulate their population size
without recourse to disaster, predation, and disease as Darwin
postulated.">
Weley Elseberry responded:
<The first paragraph of Origin of Species indicates that the reporter,
at least, needs a refresher course. Note the word used there:
"coadaptation". Not "adaptation". Claiming that a raw, spite-only
competition represents the whole of Darwin's argument for natural
selection is a *gross* misrepresentation.
Also, the ecologists mentioned said that competition between species
was more rare than one might expect, but the reporter extended that
statement to "species and individuals", which doesn't jibe with
the various studies cited by Pianka in "Evolutionary Ecology".>
But what about my question? Is Eldredge's claim correct?
Russ
Russell Maatman
e-mail: rmaat@mtcnet.net
Home: 401 5th Avenue
Sioux Center, IA 51250