Rate changes for evolution

I think people are missing another important part of PE theory. This has to do with population size. As theorized, small populations are able to build up beneficial mutations faster, especially at the periphery of the larger population where selection may be stronger. That is, a beneficial mutation will spread through a small population in fewer generations than in a larger population. These changes then sweep through the larger populations, or the larger population is overtaken by the new species/sub-species. My own understanding is that population size is just as important within PE theory as mutation rates, and that if the larger population is kept as a cohesive unit, gradualism may play a role.

quote:

---

I'm not sure what the consensus is - or if there is a consensus - on which is most important. I would tend to the view that speciation is more important because the same forces that cause speciation promote evolutionary change.

---

Not only that, but speciation isolates genetic populations which will eventually lead to divergent body plans over time. Stasis could be argued after speciation, but I think we can also agree that speciation is the first step towards large differences in morphology. To me, speciation is more important than gradualism in describing the mechanisms for biological diversity. PE doesn't argue with the mechanisms (random mutations and natural selection) but rather about what we would expect to see in the progression from one niche strategy and the next and the consequences both in morphology and in the fossil record. I'll stop here, this is too much like preaching to the choir.