Rufus/Bank
25 October 2006 23:32![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
enismirdalRufus came from Cambridge and spent much of the day around our lab talking to people (not me, as what I'm doing is sort of boring), and gave his talk. Which was pitched at a fairly basic level with lots of reiteration so the undergraduates could follow, which was nice I suppose. He had to rescue my brain from badly taught calculus a few times, so he is definitely good at the whole explaining thing.
The talk was interesting as well! It was about menopause and the evolutionary significance of it, extending it beyond the grandmother hypothesis and adding some new theories. It was largely speculative, with not a lot of experimental backing to it, but the arguments seemed good to me. Debated it with one of the other PhD students later in the day and yes, she's was right that his skipping over the modelling process and equations meant we missed some of the reasoning. I'm sure with some experimental backing it will make a good paper, in any case!
This morning I finally got to Bethnal Green when the bank deigned to open, and sorted out my change of address. With a disproportionate amount of faff. The cashier didn't have a clue about my ISA, however, so suggested I phoned the number on the statement. It's 0845 (I think that's National Rate, no?), so will be fairly pricey from my mobile. I still resent the idea of having to pay money to keep control of my money!
Tomorrow I'm meant to Aikido, but I just hope I have more energy then than I do now. I am incredibly unbelievably tired. Must not forget to iron gi tomorrow...
The talk was interesting as well! It was about menopause and the evolutionary significance of it, extending it beyond the grandmother hypothesis and adding some new theories. It was largely speculative, with not a lot of experimental backing to it, but the arguments seemed good to me. Debated it with one of the other PhD students later in the day and yes, she's was right that his skipping over the modelling process and equations meant we missed some of the reasoning. I'm sure with some experimental backing it will make a good paper, in any case!
This morning I finally got to Bethnal Green when the bank deigned to open, and sorted out my change of address. With a disproportionate amount of faff. The cashier didn't have a clue about my ISA, however, so suggested I phoned the number on the statement. It's 0845 (I think that's National Rate, no?), so will be fairly pricey from my mobile. I still resent the idea of having to pay money to keep control of my money!
Tomorrow I'm meant to Aikido, but I just hope I have more energy then than I do now. I am incredibly unbelievably tired. Must not forget to iron gi tomorrow...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 28 Oct 2006 01:44 (UTC)The grandmother hypothesis explains why a woman should carry on living after the age at which she stops breeding, but doesn't necessarily explain why she should stop breeding in the first place. Elephants breed into their 60s and some whales into their 90s, so a woman who was popping out babies into her 70s would surely enjoy greater evolutionary success!
So...what if there's intergenerational conflict going on? Human and higher primate society is characterised by a high level of female dispersal - i.e. whereas in lower primates the males are often driven out to start their own groups, in higher primates the females leave and join other groups. This means that an older woman is less likely to live with her daughters and more likely to live with her daughters in law.
In a family/community where resources and food are limited, there might not be enough for both the woman and her daughter in law to raise children, so there will be a "battle" over who gets to do the breeding1. Now, the older woman is related to any child of her daughter in law by 0.25. But the daughter in law is not related to the older woman's children at all! So she has more to lose if she gives up breeding. Therefore the mother in law will be the first to give in in the "battle" and will instead invest in her indirect fitness, by helping to raise her grandchildren.
The theory's not entirely tested, but would throw out some predictions:
1. Offspring survival might be correlated more with the presence of a paternal grandmother than a maternal one.
2. There may be selective pressure on women to start their childbearing life by having daughters, as this will delay the arrival of the inevitable daughters in law by a few years longer, giving the woman a chance to have a couple more children.
3. When women have no daughters in law present, they may have the physiological plasticity to enter menopause later.
But all these are tentative suggestions as opposed to anything hard and fast or proven. The theory is interesting, but needs testing!
1Waged in a stepwise manner that can be mathematically modelled and I could probably explain (albeit badly) but it would take me about 3 pages.
no subject
Date: 26 Oct 2006 06:12 (UTC)Abner
no subject
Date: 26 Oct 2006 07:41 (UTC)no subject
Date: 26 Oct 2006 10:07 (UTC)To what were you referring?
Abner
no subject
Date: 28 Oct 2006 01:32 (UTC)no subject
Date: 26 Oct 2006 07:15 (UTC)no subject
Date: 27 Oct 2006 06:19 (UTC)Abner