Abstract

Current unease over the adequacy of neo-Darwinism as an explanation of many evolutionary events has led to a refurbishing of ideas expressed during the 1940s (and later) by Richard Goldschmidt; these include the concepts of "macromutations" and "hopeful monsters." Because Goldschmidt's ideas in their original form were defined, tested, and found wanting, a revival of their descriptive labels generates confusion and should be discouraged. Many persons who are opposed to neo-Darwinism believe that much of molecular genetics lies outside the conceptual framework of population genetics; this belief is wrong. As a branch of genetics, population genetics embraces (indeed, must embrace) molecular findings, many of which have already been incorporated into the fabric of population and evolutionary genetics.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call