On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 16:06:33 +0000 (UTC), johnsuth{at}nospam.com.au
wrote:

>  
>Popular writers often use the word adapt to imply passing on something
that was not    
>inherited, but I think this smacks of Lamark.  
>  
>So in the context of evolution, what is adaptation?  
>  
>[moderator's note: This appeared in the management account mail
>queue (evolution-request, rather than evolution), but it seems
>obvious it was intended for posting. As the author includes no
>useable email address (I suspect it's johnsuth at acenet.com.au,
>but can't be sure), I'm posting it as is. - JAH] 
>
>
>John Sutherland
>Phone & Fax +61 2 4683 1511 
>9 Meryla Street, Couridjah NSW 2571 Australia

Adaptation is a very general term for a change in a cell, an organism,
or a population (species) over time to adjust or modify some aspect of
its behavior or function to the environment.

There is sensory adaptation where a sensory neuron ceases to respond
(or responds more weakly) to a sustained stimulus.  The time scale may
be on the order of seconds.  There is physiological adaptation to
environmental circumstances that occurs on the time scale of seconds
or minutes to days and months.  There is evolutionary adaptation that
occurs over generations and is expressed as changes in the genetic
information. 

So when you say "popular writers often use the word..." are you
meaning only the latter notion, the evolutionary notion, or are you
including all the myriad other uses of the notion of adaptation?  I
have never heard of the usage referring to "passing on something",
though.  Could you provide some examples (with citations of source)?

You do also realize, of course, that many "popular writers" are simply
careless or even incorrect in their use of scientific notions.
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 10/11/03 8:16:57 PM