BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Mike Rossander <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 17 Sep 2014 07:56:18 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
Good morning, all -
 
I've been following this thread for a while and I think you all are trying to draw arbitrary distinctions.  Making it worse, you are trying to draw those distinctions when the language necessary for the conversation has not yet been invented.
 
Adaptation is an incremental process.  If I put on a coat when it gets cold, I have "adapted" in a small way to my environment.  If after two or three years in the new state, my metabolism adjusts and I can tolerate colder weather, I have "adapted" somewhat more.   If over the course of a generation or three, my descendents learn to how to identify the high-energy-density foods of their new environment, they have "adapted" still more.  If after more generations, my descendents start to grow fur, they will have "adapted" in a greater way.  Eventually, my descendents may develop into a separate species.  At that point, everyone would agree that they are "adapted" to the new environment.  Somewhere along the way, peole would agree that they "evolved".  But there are no words or measurements for all the shadings along the path and the word "adapted" is equally applicable at every step.

One exception - the metabolism adjustment in humans can be called "acclimatization".  (I'm not sure how that concept would apply to bees, though.  Does the individual bee acclimatize or is it the super-organism that is the colony that acclimatizes?)

If, as some have said, the history of science is the history of our ability to measure the world around us, then biology is still a very young science.  What we need is a biological equivalent to the concept of momentum.  Or more precisely, a biological equivalent of our ability to measure momentum in newton-seconds.  Until we have that clear and precise language and ability to measure, this argument over "adaptation" strikes me as no more solvable than the debates over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

And that means that for now at least, "locally adapted" is a sales gimmick with no more usefulness that the claim that my shampoo is "all natural".

Mike Rossander    

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2