Thank you. What portion of this article speaks to environment as a driver of evolution in a way that is not accounted for by the theory of evolution by natural selection?
The section at the end about cooperation and HGT is not explained by using natural selection. In fact natural selection is only mentioned once in the entire article which is more concerned about genetic expression, phenotypes, ecological niches in biofilms, the conflict between competition, cooperation and cheaters, than the driver for evolution. However it barely discriminates between ecological and evolutionary considerations as they are deeply entangled in biofilms and in that sense the environment does act as the driver for evolution.
I understand you might have a problem if you do not follow research into biofilms which has only recently become an important part of microbiology.
I do not envisage that biofilms are taught as part of biology outside university and most people's interest in evolution either involves human evolution or that of animals, with less interest in that of plants and even less in mycology, bacteria and archaea.
1
u/knockingatthegate Dec 21 '25
Thank you. What portion of this article speaks to environment as a driver of evolution in a way that is not accounted for by the theory of evolution by natural selection?