02.05.2013 Views

Evolution__3rd_Edition

Evolution__3rd_Edition

Evolution__3rd_Edition

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

552 PART 5 / Macroevolution<br />

Figure 18.14<br />

The origin of higher taxa<br />

could theoretically be by (a)<br />

extrapolated microevolution<br />

over long time periods, or (b)<br />

a distinct process that does not<br />

operate in microevolution. The<br />

two ideas are here illustrated for<br />

the evolution of mammals from<br />

reptiles. (a) and (b) are not the<br />

only two possible relations<br />

between microevolution and<br />

macroevolution. See also<br />

Figure 1.7 (p. 14) for another<br />

way of imagining (b).<br />

But some features of<br />

macroevolution are not predictable<br />

from microevolution<br />

Form<br />

(a) Extrapolation<br />

Reptiles<br />

Time<br />

Mammals<br />

(b) Distinct process<br />

occur in taxa living at the poles than in taxa living at the equator. Kemp (1999) argued<br />

that, in the origin of mammals, it was usually a small carnivorous taxa that gave rise to<br />

the next major radiation. Thus, at each stage (Figure 18.10) a variety of forms evolved a<br />

large and small herbivores, small carnivores, and others. We might expect that sometimes<br />

the next major radiation would begin with a large herbivore, and sometimes with<br />

a small carnivore. But in fact small carnivores are disproportionately represented.<br />

If Kemp, Jablonski, and Bottjer, are right, macroevolution is not simply extrapolated<br />

microevolution. At any one time, natural selection will be favoring a variety of adaptations<br />

in different lineages a tropical adaptations in tropical species, polar adaptations<br />

in polar species. Something about the polar adaptation makes them more likely to contribute<br />

to macroevolutionary change. That something, whatever it is, cannot be seen<br />

simply by studying microevolution.<br />

The theory of macroevolution in Figure 18.14b is controversial. If correct, it would<br />

challenge some deep tenets of neo-Darwinism. But the general idea that macroevolution<br />

is not simply predictable from microevolution need not be controversial. Kemp,<br />

Jablonski, and Bottjer’s arguments are orthodox enough. In the other chapters of Part 5<br />

we shall look at several macroevolutionary phenomena, and reflect on their conceptual<br />

relation with microevolution. In some cases, macroevolution will likely be extrapolatable<br />

from microevolution; in other cases macroevolution will likely not be extrapolatable<br />

from microevolution. In this chapter, we have seen that the origin of higher taxa<br />

can at least be mainly understood as the evolution of adaptation by natural selection<br />

over the long term.<br />

Form<br />

Reptiles<br />

Time<br />

Mammals<br />

..

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!