I am somewhat new to evolutionary biology, having studied it onmy free time as a computer science student. There is one particularthing that has always bothered me for which I have not seen a goodtreatment, relating to adaptations to the environment with respectto genetic diversity. If it is possible for a population to adaptto rapid environmental changes, and they don't have an adaptationfor dealing with change directly (such as a complex brain), itseems to me that every generation must have present within themalmost every possible environmental adaptation that the populationis capable of expressing (including many irrelevant ones and a fewrelevant to the particular environmental challenge). Otherwise, itmay take too many generations to deal with a change, which may bedisastrous for the population.
So my question would be: how does an evolutionary biologistexplain the mechanics behind the ability for a population to adaptquickly? Are most environmental changes slow or gradual enough thatthe population has a few generations to happen upon the mutationsthat will allow it to survive, and have generally been successfulin this regard for 3.5 billion years? Or, are a large majority ofpossible adaptations present in almost every generation, and justserve no purpose or advantage for most of the population if theprovided "benefit" is unneeded (i.e., are effectively neutral)? Orsomething in between?
I am somewhat new to evolutionary biology, having studied it onmy free time as a computer science student. There is one particularthing that has always bothered me for which I have not seen a goodtreatment, relating to adaptations to the environment with respectto genetic diversity. If it is possible for a population to adaptto rapid environmental changes, and they don't have an adaptationfor dealing with change directly (such as a complex brain), itseems to me that every generation must have present within themalmost every possible environmental adaptation that the populationis capable of expressing (including many irrelevant ones and a fewrelevant to the particular environmental challenge). Otherwise, itmay take too many generations to deal with a change, which may bedisastrous for the population.
So my question would be: how does an evolutionary biologistexplain the mechanics behind the ability for a population to adaptquickly? Are most environmental changes slow or gradual enough thatthe population has a few generations to happen upon the mutationsthat will allow it to survive, and have generally been successfulin this regard for 3.5 billion years? Or, are a large majority ofpossible adaptations present in almost every generation, and justserve no purpose or advantage for most of the population if theprovided "benefit" is unneeded (i.e., are effectively neutral)? Orsomething in between?
