Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Peppered moth evolution
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Majerus's experiment == {{further|Michael E. N. Majerus}} From 2001 to 2007, Majerus carried out experiments in Cambridge to resolve the various criticisms of Kettlewell's experiment. During his experiment, he noted the natural resting positions of peppered moths. Of the 135 moths examined, over half were on tree branches, mostly on the lower half of the branch; 37% were on tree trunks, mostly on the north side; and only 12.6% were resting on or under twigs. Following correspondence with Hooper, he added an experiment to find if [[bats]], not birds, could be the main predators. He observed a number of species of bird actually preying on the moths, and found that differential bird predation was a major factor responsible for the decline in ''carbonaria'' frequency compared to ''typica''.<ref name=swedentalk/> He described his results as a complete vindication of the natural selection theory of peppered moth evolution, and said "If the rise and fall of the peppered moth is one of the most visually impacting and easily understood examples of Darwinian evolution in action, it should be taught. It provides after all the proof of evolution."<ref name=indy>{{cite news |title=Moth study backs classic 'test case' for Darwin's theory |last=Connor |first=Steve |date=25 August 2007 |newspaper=The Independent |url=http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article2893896.ece |access-date=9 September 2007 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081007043307/http://news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/article2893896.ece |archive-date=7 October 2008}}</ref> Majerus died before he could complete the writing up of his experiments, so the work was carried on by Cook, Grant, Saccheri, and [[James Mallet]], and published on 8 February 2012 as "Selective bird predation on the peppered moth: the last experiment of Michael Majerus."<ref name="pandas 080212">{{cite web |last=Matzke |first=Nick |title=Selective bird predation on the peppered moth: the last experiment of Michael Majerus |publisher=[[The Panda's Thumb (blog)|The Panda's Thumb]] |date=8 February 2012 |url=https://pandasthumb.org/archives/2012/02/selective-bird.html |access-date=7 March 2012}}</ref> The experiment became the largest ever in the study of industrial melanism, involving 4,864 individuals in a six-year investigation, and it confirmed that melanism in moths is a genuine example of natural selection involving camouflage and predation. Their concluding remark runs: "These data provide the most direct evidence yet to implicate camouflage and bird predation as the overriding explanation for the rise and fall of melanism in moths."<ref name="Cook2012"/> Coyne said he was "delighted to agree with this conclusion [of Majerus's experiment], which answers my previous criticisms about the ''Biston'' story."<ref name="Coyne 1202012">{{cite web |last=Coyne |first=Jerry |author-link=Jerry Coyne |title=The peppered moth story is solid |website=Why Evolution Is True |date=12 February 2012 |url=http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/02/10/the-peppered-moth-story-is-solid/ |access-date=7 March 2012}}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)