R. A. Fisher and the Adaptive Landscape:
...My own interpretation is that Fisher was sceptical about the value of the landscape concept as such, because both environmental and genetic conditions were too changeable for the metaphor of a 'landscape' to be useful. For Fisher the question of the 'shape' of the landscape therefore did not arise as a major issue, and he had no need to take a firm view on it. I discuss this interpretation below the fold.
Read the whole thing.
Related: R. A. Fisher and Epistasis, Notes on Sewall Wright: Population Size, Notes on Sewall Wright: the Measurement of Kinship, Notes on Sewall Wright: Path Analysis, On Reading Wright and Notes on Sewall Wright: Migration
- Log in to post comments
More like this
David takes a slight detour in this Sewall Wright, series, R. A. Fisher and Epistasis:
My next note on Sewall Wright will cover the exciting subject of the adaptive landscape. As every schoolboy knows, Wright considered epistatic gene interactions very important in determining the 'peaks' of the…
David continues his series on the thinking of the great evolutionary geneticist Sewall Wright. Today's post, Notes on Sewall Wright: Migration. First, the general:
Continuing my series of notes on Sewall Wright's population genetics, I come to the subject of migration. This is important in…
Notes on Sewall Wright: Population Size:
Continuing my series of notes on the work of Sewall Wright, I come to the question of population size. This is important in Wright's formulation of population genetics and his evolutionary theory generally. One of the major differences between Wright and R.…
David's penultimate post on Sewall Wright, Notes on Sewall Wright: The Shifting Balance Theory - Part 1:
Two catch-phrases indissolubly linked with Sewall Wright are the adaptive landscape, and the shifting balance. In preparing my note on Wright's concept of the adaptive landscape I was surprised…