The extended phenotype(s): a comparison with niche construction theory

Verfasser / Beitragende:
[David Wells]
Ort, Verlag, Jahr:
2015
Enthalten in:
Biology & Philosophy, 30/4(2015-07-01), 547-567
Format:
Artikel (online)
ID: 605448337
LEADER caa a22 4500
001 605448337
003 CHVBK
005 20210128100136.0
007 cr unu---uuuuu
008 210128e20150701xx s 000 0 eng
024 7 0 |a 10.1007/s10539-015-9476-0  |2 doi 
035 |a (NATIONALLICENCE)springer-10.1007/s10539-015-9476-0 
100 1 |a Wells  |D David  |u Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, 2109, Sydney, NSW, Australia  |4 aut 
245 1 4 |a The extended phenotype(s): a comparison with niche construction theory  |h [Elektronische Daten]  |c [David Wells] 
520 3 |a While niche construction theory locates animal artefacts in their constructors' environment, hence treating them as capable of exerting selective pressure on both the constructors and their descendants, the extended phenotype concept assimilates artefacts with their constructors' genes. Analogous contrasts apply in the case of endoparasite and brood parasite genes influencing host behaviour. The explanatory power of these competing approaches are assessed by re-examining the core chapters of Richard Dawkins' The Extended Phenotype. Because animal artefacts (chapter 11) have multiple evolutionary consequences for their constructors, the extra-body effects of a gene seemingly include feedback effects on multiple other genes, a result which is more consistent with niche construction theory than with selfish gene theory. In the case of endoparasite genes influencing host behaviour (chapter 12), Dawkins' argument leaves out what appears to be the key explanatory component, namely the role of the host's own bodily systems in making it possible for such genes to exist. For action at a distance (chapter 13), it is unclear whether the key genes have extended effects because they sit in the body of the manipulating organism, or alternatively do not have such effects because they sit in the body of its victim. It is argued that niche construction theory offers a superior explanation in all three cases, regardless of whether the extended phenotype concept is interpreted in selfish gene or selfish organism terms. 
540 |a Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, 2015 
690 7 |a Extended phenotype  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Niche construction theory  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Selfish gene  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Selfish organism  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Animal artefact  |2 nationallicence 
690 7 |a Parasite  |2 nationallicence 
773 0 |t Biology & Philosophy  |d Springer Netherlands  |g 30/4(2015-07-01), 547-567  |x 0169-3867  |q 30:4<547  |1 2015  |2 30  |o 10539 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-015-9476-0  |q text/html  |z Onlinezugriff via DOI 
898 |a BK010053  |b XK010053  |c XK010000 
900 7 |a Metadata rights reserved  |b Springer special CC-BY-NC licence  |2 nationallicence 
908 |D 1  |a research-article  |2 jats 
949 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |F NATIONALLICENCE  |b NL-springer 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 856  |E 40  |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-015-9476-0  |q text/html  |z Onlinezugriff via DOI 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 100  |E 1-  |a Wells  |D David  |u Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, 2109, Sydney, NSW, Australia  |4 aut 
950 |B NATIONALLICENCE  |P 773  |E 0-  |t Biology & Philosophy  |d Springer Netherlands  |g 30/4(2015-07-01), 547-567  |x 0169-3867  |q 30:4<547  |1 2015  |2 30  |o 10539