Sentence examples for debate of selection from inspiring English sources

An increasing fraction of "junk DNA" is associated with a function and as a result the debate of selection in intron sequences transitioned to a standoff between opposing "efficiency" and "design" models.

This question is equivalent to the long-standing and contentious debate on units of selection in ecological evolution or speciation where philosophy, semantics and biological principles have enjoyed an uneasy relationship (Sober and Wilson 1994; Ridley 2003; Okasha 2006).

These errors have nothing to do with sophisticated debates about levels of selection (Dugatkin and Reeve 1994; Keller 1999).

Questions relating to evolvability are also tied up with difficult issues relating to the units-of-selection debate (Okasha 2006).

This framework is entirely different from both sides of the levels-of-selection debate.

My proposed solution to this problem (see the section "Genetic evolutionary trends exist on all timescales ") warrants attention, because it is distinctly different from both sides of the levels-of-selection debate.

In a speech for today's function, Swan avoids the debate over the method of selection.

While he admitted that the "vehicle" was necessary for the selection process, he did not want to accord it any weight in the units of selection debate because it was not the beneficiary, but rather an agent of the beneficiary.

The levels of selection debate includes questions about whether all evolutionary explanations can be cast in terms of genes and whether selection operates primarily or exclusively on the genetic level (Okasha 2006).

Let us recall what the interactor question in the units of selection debate amounts to: What levels of entities interact with their environments through their traits in such a way that it makes a difference to replicator success?

Despite Eikenberry and Woodhull's insistence that general science should focus on methods rather than content and the SMA's emphasis on the importance of professional judgement in interpreting the syllabus, science educators, nonetheless, continued to debate the selection of subject matter and its manner of integration.