24
Famous Bad Decisions

Famous Bad Decisions

  • Upload
    trella

  • View
    22

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Famous Bad Decisions. 1886 - Sors Hariezon. 1933-Joe Shuster & Jerry Siegel. 1955-Sam Phillips. 1862 - Ambrose Burnside. 1876 - George Custer. 1929 – Trofim Lysenko. Head of Soviet Ministry of Agriculture Strong advocate of Lamarckian Evolution (acquired characteristics) - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Famous Bad Decisions

Famous Bad Decisions

Page 2: Famous Bad Decisions

1886 -Sors Hariezon

Page 3: Famous Bad Decisions

1933-Joe Shuster & Jerry Siegel

Page 4: Famous Bad Decisions

1955-Sam Phillips

Page 5: Famous Bad Decisions

1862 - Ambrose Burnside

Page 6: Famous Bad Decisions

1876 - George Custer

Page 7: Famous Bad Decisions

1929 – Trofim Lysenko

• Head of Soviet Ministry of Agriculture

• Strong advocate of Lamarckian Evolution (acquired characteristics)

• Attempted to vernalize wheat by freezing prior to germination

Page 8: Famous Bad Decisions
Page 9: Famous Bad Decisions
Page 10: Famous Bad Decisions
Page 11: Famous Bad Decisions
Page 12: Famous Bad Decisions

Differential Reproduction• The driving force

behind evolution• Populations shift

because not all members of the population have the same fitness

• Nature provides selective pressures that determine who reproduces most

Page 13: Famous Bad Decisions

Selective Pressure

• Nature “selects” for various phenotypes based upon whether or not the features of the organism increase its differential reproduction

Page 14: Famous Bad Decisions
Page 15: Famous Bad Decisions

Modes of Natural Selection

• Stabilizing: Favors average phenotypes

• Directional: one phenotypic extreme favored

• Disruptive: Both extreme phenotypes are favored

Page 16: Famous Bad Decisions

Directional Selection & Industrial Melanism (Kettlewell Moth Experiment)

Page 17: Famous Bad Decisions

Transitioning Phenotypes

Page 18: Famous Bad Decisions

Stabilizing Selection

Page 19: Famous Bad Decisions

Stabilizing Selection

Page 20: Famous Bad Decisions

Disruptive Selection

Page 21: Famous Bad Decisions

Disruptive Selection

Page 22: Famous Bad Decisions

Endler’s Trinidadian Guppy Analysis

Page 23: Famous Bad Decisions

Trinidadian Guppy Analysis

• Purpose: To see how the selective pressures of coloration and predation affect the phenotypic distribution in a population

• Hypotheses to Be Tested:– Bright coloration leads to preferential mating,

causing the population to shift towards bright.– Bright coloration leads to increased predation,

leading to a phenotypic shift towards drab

Page 24: Famous Bad Decisions

Procedure

• To access simulation, google “Sex and the Single Guppy”

• There are nine (9) combinations of predator and prey to test.

• Each simulation should be run for 100 weeks. Stop manually at this point

• BEFORE looking at analysis of results, record the phenotypic results, pop. size and # of Generations