Tangle writes:
What we have evidence for though is that bottlencks do not necessarily reduce gentic diversity in the long term. The main requirement for recovery is the ability to breed freely and often.
Is there a reason the term "recovery" is used all the time when referencing this?
It would seem to me that for the genetic diversity to increase, brand new "genetic diversity" would have to be created.
That is:
Let's say genetic diversity was 6.2
Then there was a bottle neck and it dopped to 1.3
Then the genetic diversity worked it's way back up to 6.2 again.
I can see the use of the word "recovery" in this sense.
But I think it's important to note (especially in context with the EvC debate) that the "recovered" genetic diversity is entirely new. It's not "getting back" the same old genetic information from before... it's entirely new genetic information. It's simply the
level of diversity that's "recovered..." but brand new
genetic information has been created in order for the diversity to get back to that level.
This should be rather simple to prove out as well by comparing the genetic information from before and after... if it's different, then new genetic information was obviously created. If the genetic information is exactly the same... then my idea is falsified.
There's far too much I don't understand about genetics for me to make much more progress on this and I don't like making stuff up.
I know even less than you, I'm sure. So I've probably screwed up a few terms in my post. But I hope I was able to get my idea across?
™ Version 4.2
(1)
