Answer the following question based on what you know about sexual selection and displays.
You have received a $500,000 grant from the National Science Foundation to study male signaling in peacock spiders. After your university takes most of that money for overhead costs, you now have a small amount left over to spend on peacock spider research over the next 3 years. What is the first question that you would focus on that you think would increase our understanding of peacock spider male displays the most? State a relevant hypothesis and explain briefly how you would go about testing it.
You have published your paper describing the above experiment, and it has been picked up by th press. Shortly thereafter, you are contacted by a member of the Discovery Institute, who claims that these displays are so complex that they could not possibly have evolved and that this complexity is evidence of intelligent design. This person challenges you to a public debate of the issue, which you accept because you enjoy frustration and have nothing better to do with your time. What evidence would you need to support your contentation that these complex displays 1) are currently under selection , and 2) have evolved to their current form under the auspices of selection?
Answer the following question based on what you know about sexual selection and displays.
You have received a $500,000 grant from the National Science Foundation to study male signaling in peacock spiders. After your university takes most of that money for overhead costs, you now have a small amount left over to spend on peacock spider research over the next 3 years. What is the first question that you would focus on that you think would increase our understanding of peacock spider male displays the most? State a relevant hypothesis and explain briefly how you would go about testing it.
You have published your paper describing the above experiment, and it has been picked up by th press. Shortly thereafter, you are contacted by a member of the Discovery Institute, who claims that these displays are so complex that they could not possibly have evolved and that this complexity is evidence of intelligent design. This person challenges you to a public debate of the issue, which you accept because you enjoy frustration and have nothing better to do with your time. What evidence would you need to support your contentation that these complex displays 1) are currently under selection , and 2) have evolved to their current form under the auspices of selection?
