This year, if you get a picture of a rose instead of an
actual rose, keep the following in mind: Roses that make a good picture don't
smell like much, so you're not missing anything!
Roses are popular, and they have been cultivated over
centuries to have all kinds of different features. Some are chosen to smell
good, and some to look good. That usually means the roses that look good do not
smell good. (Some varieties are simply more durable; when you're shipping those
flowers all over the world, durability is a desired trait.)
And wouldn't you know it; people tend to like the kind
that look good more than the latter. This means most of our roses these days
have lost their multisensory seduction.
This is great example of natural selection at its most sophisticated
–in the domain of the anthroposphere. It is true that humans are selecting the
flowers they want to propagate, and that doesn't sound like nature at the
wheel.
But these humans impose their artificial selection
pressures only in response to market forces, or customer demand, or fashion, or
whatever you want to call it. And as any fashion designer will tell you, there
is not much reasoning behind the preferences of populations. Individuals
perhaps, but populations not so much.
In a game of complexity theory, every individual makes
decisions that are a result of every other individual. The resulting decisions
then determine the kinds of flowers selected. Channeling Dawkins' Memetics, the scentless rose
is an extended
phenotype of our collective selection process. Is that natural or
artificial?
Notes:
Susan Milius for
Science News, 2018
O. Raymond et al. The Rosa genome provides new insights
into the domestication of modern roses. Nature Genetics. Published online April
30, 2018. doi:10.1038/s41588-018-0110-3.
Mental Floss, 2018
Richard Dawkins,
1982
Post Script:
Favorite "Rose" perfume:
Mon
Nom est Rouge by Majda Bekkali (for women and men)
No comments:
Post a Comment