It is thus that natural selection acts. Natural selection weeds out
relentlessly all organisms which display unfavourable variations. It is
thus obvious that many species may, and we believe do, exist which
possess characters of no direct utility to them, or even slightly harmful
ones. For this reason Wallace and his followers fail in their attempts to
prove that every patch of colour in every organism is of direct utility.
Natural selection has to take an animal as it finds it—the good with the
bad. If an organism as a whole is not wanting—that is to say, if it is
able to hold its own against other organisms, and is fitted to fill any
place in nature—that organism will probably survive, although it may be
defective in many respects. As its name implies, natural selection is a
mere selecting agency. It has to choose from what is presented to it. It
is not, as many seem to think, a manufacturer or inducer of variations.
Natural selection can no more _make_ an animal vary in any given
direction than the human breeder can. Its power is limited to the
destroying of all variations which do not pass the test prescribed by it.
CHAPTER VII
SEXUAL DIMORPHISM
Meaning of the term—Fatal to Wallaceism—Sexual Selection—The law of
battle—Female preference—Mutual Selection—Finn’s experiments—Objections
to the theory of Sexual Selection—Wallace’s explanation of sexual
dimorphism stated and shown to be unsatisfactory—The explanation of
Thomson and Geddes shown to be inadequate—Stolzmann’s theory stated and
criticised—Neo-Lamarckian explanation of sexual dimorphism stated and
criticised—Some features of sexual dimorphism—Dissimilarity of the
sexes probably arises as a sudden mutation—The four kinds of
mutations—Sexual dimorphism having shown itself, Natural Selection
determines whether or not the organisms which display it shall survive.
In some species the sexes are so similar in appearance that it is not
possible to tell by mere outward inspection to which sex a given
individual belongs.
In other species the sexes differ so widely in external appearance that
it is difficult to believe that the male and the female belong to the
same species. Between these two extremes are a great number of species in
which the sexes are more or less dissimilar. Those species in which the
sexes differ in appearance are said to be sexually dimorphic. The
phenomena of sexual dimorphism are fatal to that form of Neo-Darwinism
which sees in natural selection an explanation of all the peculiarities
of animal structure and colouration.
It is not easy to understand how natural selection can have caused marked
sexual dimorphism in a species where the habits of the sexes are the
same, in the Paradise Flycatcher (_Terpsiphone paradisi_), for example,
where the cock and the hen obtain their food in the same way, and share
equally the duties of nest-building, incubation, and feeding the young.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account