Rather than being a cooperative venture between the sexes, sexual reproduction was now viewed in terms of conflicts of interests, and in so doing provided an explanation for female promiscuity (albeit in a male-biased sort of way). Until this point, sexual selection had been concerned exclusively Dasatinib manufacturer with mate acquisition. With an evolutionary perspective focussing on individuals, it was recognized that sexual selection might continue after insemination, and that rather than competing for partners, males compete for fertilizations. Later it was acknowledged that females,
through cryptic processes can also influence the outcome of sperm competition. Today, post-copulatory sexual selection provides explanations for many previously bewildering reproductive traits, including the extraordinary diversity in male and female genitalia, the design of spermatozoa and ova, of seminal fluid and of copulation behaviour selleck chemicals llc itself Thomas Henry Huxley played a vital role in promoting Darwin’s concept of evolution by natural selection. Most famously, on 30 June 1860, at a meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science – a meeting some later described as the most memorable of their lives – Huxley ran circles round Soapy Sam, the Bishop of Oxford, over who had the right – theologians
or scientists – to explain the origin of species. Darwin wasn’t there – luckily – for as he knew full well, had he been, his gentle manner may have meant losing to the bishop. Instead, bulldog Huxley, together with Darwin’s closest friend, Joseph Hooker, ably medchemexpress defended the scientific viewpoint. On the Bishop’s side was the Bible-touting Captain Fitzroy, with whom Darwin had shared a dinner table on the Beagle, and with whom Darwin had crossed swords over science and religion on more than one occasion during their long voyage (Desmond, 1994, 1997). Others in the Oxford audience, including the ornithologist Henry Tristram (later Canon Tristram), were unconvinced by the scientific case. Tristram had been persuaded by Alfred
Newton – Britain’s leading ornithologist – to interpret some of his ornithological results in terms of natural selection. However, the Oxford meeting changed Tristam’s mind about Darwin and he told Newton, who was sitting next to him, that from now on he was an anti-Darwinian. Tristram objected, he said, to seeing the guardian of the nation’s soul shouted down by a mob hailing ‘the God Darwin and his prophet Huxley’ (Cohen, 1985). Darwin … needed a champion as Huxley needed a cause’ (Desmond, 1994, p. 260) and long after the Oxford meeting, Huxley continued to fight Darwin’s fights with a razor intellect and acerbic wit, and although he was convinced by evolution, he was less convinced that natural selection was the mechanism.