09-09-2010, 12:45 PM
Hi Pete
I have been thinking about this:
I think you are mistaken. Regardless of your theory of evolution, there is constant communication between prey and hunter. The prey that manages to communicate that it less likely to be worth the energy spent to catch it is most likely to survive. Behaviour (like stotting) that communicates this is hence more likely to permit the prey to survive long enough to procreate. Now, it may be that the stotting serves some other purpose, but the premise is reasonable.
I have been thinking about this:
(09-04-2010, 03:48 AM)--Pete Wrote:ShadowHM Wrote:Instead, Zahavi proposed that each gazelle was communicating to the cheetah that it was a fitter individual than its fellows and that the predator should avoid chasing it.
I think Zahavi is projecting. Or, at least, the way it is reported here is incorrect. In the gene based theory of evolution, the gazelle communicates nothing. And the cheetah would not read such a communication even if it existed.
I think you are mistaken. Regardless of your theory of evolution, there is constant communication between prey and hunter. The prey that manages to communicate that it less likely to be worth the energy spent to catch it is most likely to survive. Behaviour (like stotting) that communicates this is hence more likely to permit the prey to survive long enough to procreate. Now, it may be that the stotting serves some other purpose, but the premise is reasonable.
And you may call it righteousness
When civility survives,
But I've had dinner with the Devil and
I know nice from right.
From Dinner with the Devil, by Big Rude Jake
When civility survives,
But I've had dinner with the Devil and
I know nice from right.
From Dinner with the Devil, by Big Rude Jake