Quote:
Originally Posted by DonDuck
When genetic changes occur in the garden, the changes are typically reported as detrimental. Is it reasonable to assume the odds of beneficial changes may occur at the same rate as detrimental changes? If genetic drift occurs due to environmental pressures, shouldn't the plants start producing earlier or more abundantly with greater resistance to insect and disease damage in adverse conditions? It would seem degradation may occur in perfect growing conditions while genetic improvement would occur in difficult growing conditions. In my simple way of thinking, organisms including tomatoes only have one purpose and that is to insure the future success of their species. If I was a tomato plant genetically inclined to improve the probability of species survival, I would produce seed bearing fruit as early and late as possible. Each fruit would be small, thorny, foul tasting, and as toxic as possible.
|
I believe it is mutations, rather than genetic drift, that occurs due to environmental pressures. (The drift afaict applies only to recessive alleles that accumulate in plants that are not entirely homozygous = not really stable OP's). I agree I don't see why mutations should be detrimental, on the contrary. Drift is usually seen as negative, with recessive alleles that accumulate unintentionally due to small population size. But ultimately it's the selection that we do when we save seeds, that determines if a mutation or a drift, good or bad, is passed on.
You would not want to be small, thorny foul tasting and toxic, if your co-evolutionary success depended on animals that adore large smooth sweet and healthful fruit, and save their seeds, and plant and nurture their young every year.
We are as important to tomatoes as they are to us.
