Reply
Sun 24 Jun, 2012 02:07 am
I'm trying to understand the nature of maladaptation so would you say that these statements are true? Why or why not?
Genotypic maladaptation can be represented as an abnormal physical or genetic defect which hinders the growth or survivability of a particular organism e.g. hereditary cancer. These mutations of the genotype create an organism that is immediately considered ‘unfit’ relative to its generational siblings and can clearly be seen to hinder the health and possible reproduction of said organism. This will generally result in that genetic mutation being naturally selected against resulting in the inevitable death of the organism. The maladaptation lead to the poor relative ‘fitness’ of the creature and thus contributed to its death.
Phenotypic maladaptation can manifest (particularly in humans) as certain social traits that perform much the same way as the genotypic mutation. That is, the phenotypic maladaptation is characterized by social institutions that harm and/ or destroy the survivability of the organisms concerned. The phenotype is the expression of the genotype within any given environment and thus like the mutations possible within the genes of a creature the same is also possible with behavioural and cultural traits. The maladaptivity of a genotypic mutation is evidenced by its harming of the creature carrying the maladaptive trait and results in its inevitable early death and this definition of maladaptivity can also be applied to any trait of the phenotype that also harms the individual or populations in question.
Thanks for your help.
@salander,
there are at least two assumptions in both of these phrases that are incorrect by general evidence. These are presented as "givens" so I cannot accept your conclusions.