Switch to: References

Citations of:

Butterflies and plants : a study in coevolution

In Francisco José Ayala & John C. Avise (eds.), Essential readings in evolutionary biology. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press (2014)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Biological levers and extended adaptationism.Gillian Barker - 2008 - Biology and Philosophy 23 (1):1-25.
    Two critiques of simple adaptationism are distinguished: anti-adaptationism and extended adaptationism. Adaptationists and anti-adaptationists share the presumption that an evolutionary explanation should identify the dominant simple cause of the evolutionary outcome to be explained. A consideration of extended-adaptationist models such as coevolution, niche construction and extended phenotypes reveals the inappropriateness of this presumption in explaining the evolution of certain important kinds of features—those that play particular roles in the regulation of organic processes, especially behavior. These biological or behavioral ‘levers’ are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Criteria for Holobionts from Community Genetics.Elisabeth A. Lloyd & Michael J. Wade - 2019 - Biological Theory 14 (3):151-170.
    We address the controversy in the literature concerning the definition of holobionts and the apparent constraints on their evolution using concepts from community population genetics. The genetics of holobionts, consisting of a host and diverse microbial symbionts, has been neglected in many discussions of the topic, and, where it has been discussed, a gene-centric, species-centric view, based in genomic conflict, has been predominant. Because coevolution takes place between traits or genes in two or more species and not, strictly speaking, between (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • When is it co-evolution? A reply to Steen and co-authors.Mark Sagoff - 2019 - Biology and Philosophy 34 (1):10.
    David Steen and co-authors in this journal offer a philosophical argument to support an “Evolutionary Community Concept” to identify what they call “evolutionary communities.” They describe these as “unique collections of species that interact and have co-evolved in a given geographic area” and that include “co-evolved dependencies between different parts of a community.” Steen et al. refer to the coevolution of assemblages, collections, communities, dependencies, interspecific and abiotic interactions, and traits, but they do not define “co-evolution” or provide an example (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations