Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site cybvax0.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!think!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh
From: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Secret Handshake
Message-ID: <475@cybvax0.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 17-Apr-85 10:59:07 EST
Article-I.D.: cybvax0.475
Posted: Wed Apr 17 10:59:07 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 20-Apr-85 02:53:55 EST
References: <902@uwmacc.UUCP>
Reply-To: mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz)
Distribution: net
Organization: Cybermation, Inc., Cambridge, MA
Lines: 25

In article <902@uwmacc.UUCP> dubois@uwmacc.UUCP (Paul DuBois) writes:
> > What useless features do you think the Irish Elk had, Paul?  Why do you
> > think they were useless?
> 
> The antlers.  I think they were useless because of all the effort Gould
> goes to, to show they weren't (i.e., that they were adapted)!

Do you mean to say that it is Gould's behavior, rather than scientific
criteria, that is deciding your belief?

Antler size in Cervids (deer, etc.) is very important in recruiting and
defending a harem, which of course is crucial to reproductive success.
Larger antlers might enable an individual to garner a larger harem.
Thus they would be useful to the individual.  This is called sexual selection.
Secondary sex characters (such as size of males in most carnivores, coloration
in many male birds, and a host of others tend to become very exaggerated.

There are probably limiting tradeoffs for the size of antlers.  We just don't
know what conditions were for the Irish Elk that minimized the penalties
involved in having large antlers.  The elk probably became extinct when
humans arrived on the scene and changed conditions by hunting, burning,
wood cutting, or whatever.
-- 

Mike Huybensz		...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh