circumstances…When a mutation occurs in a light environment that causes animal’s offspring not to have eyes, it is an enormous disadvantage…so natural selection eliminates this flaw…When the eyeless defect occurs here [in a cave], it does not give any disadvantage so it is not eliminated. In fact, it gives advantages. Those with eyes can crash into things, injuring the eyes, and can get diseases of the eyes, possibly leading to death…Eventually, selective pressures ensure that all are eyeless…These ghostly fish and amphibians swim blindly as prime examples of how mutation and natural selection lead to a reduction of functioning systems as complex genetic information has been corrupted or lost, not gained…These adaptations are no evidence at all for the belief that complexity has arisen by such processes – they only show how information can be lost in a fallen world. In sum, the historical non-evolutionary explanation of how surface-dwelling ancestors gradually transitioned into populations of cave-dwelling descendants consists of a process whereby: random genetic mutations result in a loss of information, which, in turn, produces such traits as depigmentation and blindness that are subsequently fractioned out and reproduced through natural selection. Over time, selection pressures ensure that all cavefish are eyeless. It’s enlightening to note that both non-evolutionary and evolutionary explanations are identical and use the same evolutionary assumptions to interpret the same biological phenomena (Table 1). Thus, resolving complex details of A. mexicanus pigmentation mechanisms is essential to evaluate whether historical non-evolutionary explanations are scientifically accurate and effective in altering our current, and future, perceptions of Darwinian selectionism. C. Continuous Environmental Tracking (CET) interpretation for the origin of blind cavefish Since cavefish can be directly compared to surface fish (mimicking the way that mutants are compared to wild-type phenotypes in other model organisms,) A. mexicanus is also an appropriate model organism to evaluate the interpretive assumptions and predictions of the Continuous Environmental Tracking (CET) model of adaptation. CET is a recent organism-focused, engineering-based model of adaptation (Guliuzza and Gaskill 2018) that was presented at the 8th ICC. The significance of this research is multifaceted. This model of adaptation infers that organisms actively and continuously track conditions within their specific environments to self-adjust through Table 1. Condensed outline summarizing the main elements of Neo-Darwinian Theory (NDT). (a) Darwin’s revolutionary shift from preceding theories of evolution was the initiation of an externalistic interpretive framework1. Externalism is the belief that dynamic environmental changes set the course of adaptive change in the organism-environment relationship. Environments are viewed as active agents and organisms are seen as passive modeling clay2. Externalism is the framework for the assumptions and interpretations within NDT. (b, green) NDT projects onto the environment a pseudo-agency as a causal explanation of adaptation in evolutionary scientific literature3. Nature is conferred an ability to govern verbs as a causal agent4 in a blind, unconscious manner. (c, gray) NDT has three core assumptions of what genetic and phenotypic change necessarily will be during adaptation. (d, white) The core assumptions of NDT dictate how a genetic or phenotypic change must be interpreted and characterized in evolutionary literature. (e, magenta) Inferences about how evolution and increases in biological complexity and diversification happen. 1. Gould, S.J. 2002. The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, p. 141-145. 2. Kirschner, M. and J. Gerhart. 2005. The Plausibility of Life. Yale University Press; New Haven and London. 3. Lewontin, R.C. 1983. Gene, Organism, and Environment. From Evolution from Molecules to Man, D.S. Bendall, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 4. Hodge, M.J.S. 1992. Natural selection: Current usages. In Keywords in evolutionary biology, eds. E.F. Keller and E.A. Lloyd. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. BOYLE, ARLEDGE, THOMAS, TOMKINS, AND GULIUZZA Testing the cavefish model 2023 ICC 122
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=