Releasers - Anne Kilmer couldn't possibly be more wrong!

[Xi Wang]

Ah, but again I can make the same point and ask at what point is the cutoff
for "significant fraction"?  Moreover, your statement implies that there is
such a cutoff, so let's assume you release only 1 butterfly, the least
number possible.  It is not a significant fraction (if it was, then you're
saying we should release less than 1), but that is not a necessary and
sufficient condition to guarantee that the frequency of alleles will not be
changed significantly.  If this organism has genes which makes it even 1%
fitter than the individuals in the local population, simple Hardy-Weinberg
equations show that in a few hundred generations, the alleles responsible
for conferring this fitness will be present in 99% of the population.  How's
that for significance?

Cheers,
Xi Wang

Bruce Walsh wrote:

> Xi Wang wrote
> "At what point do we characterize release as detrimental to the
> dynamics of population genetics? "
>
> There was actually a lot of discussion on this point on the list several
> years back.  The short answer is   that the number of releases must
> comprise a very significant fraction of the local population in order to
> increase the frequency of a deleterious allele in the population.
>
> Cheers
>
> bruce
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
>


 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl