× Didn't find what you were looking for? Ask a question
Top Posters
Since Sunday
5
o
5
4
m
4
b
4
x
4
a
4
l
4
t
4
S
4
m
3
s
3
New Topic  
physics11 physics11
wrote...
Posts: 1
Rep: 0 0
8 years ago Edited: 8 years ago, physics11
I've learned that in genetic variations, a certain individual animal acquires an usual trait, and if that trait is an aid in reproducing then it is passed down through the generations and is eventually turned into the norm. In other words, qualities that are helpful in reproducing are adopted by the entire species.

From this assumption I believe that I derived a false conclusion.

If what I stated above is true, then why is it that there isn't a mass overpopulation of species? It seems that there would be a genetic variation that would make it so that an individual animal would reproduce much more than the average and then that trait would lead for more children from that animal and it would be adopted by the entire species.
For example: let's say that in past times an average animal was responsible for 3 children. However it seems like if a genetic variation occurred in which an anaimal could reproduce a lot more children, such as 10, that gene would be passed down through the generations to become a norm. This would continue, through more and more variations until eventually the organisms had exhausted the materials of the planet that it was on.

Can someone clarify this for me? Thanks
Read 388 times
1 Reply

Related Topics

Replies
wrote...
Valued Member
Educator
8 years ago
Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

The premise behind your conclusion doesn't include death. Eventually, all living things have an expiry date, enhance there are still plenty of resources to go around.
New Topic      
Explore
Post your homework questions and get free online help from our incredible volunteers
  1140 People Browsing
Related Images
  
 226
  
 102
  
 246
Your Opinion
Who's your favorite biologist?
Votes: 585

Previous poll results: What's your favorite math subject?