
doi: 10.1086/690937
pmid: 28350496
Evolutionary biology is undergirded by an extensive and impressive set of mathematical models. Yet only one result, Fisher's theorem about selection and fitness, is generally accorded the status of a fundamental theorem. I argue that although its fundamental status is justified by its simplicity and scope, there are additional results that seem similarly fundamental. I suggest that the most fundamental theorem of evolution is the Price equation, both because of its simplicity and broad scope and because it can be used to derive four other familiar results that are similarly fundamental: Fisher's average-excess equation, Robertson's secondary theorem of natural selection, the breeder's equation, and Fisher's fundamental theorem. These derivations clarify both the relationships behind these results and their assumptions. Slightly less fundamental results include those for multivariate evolution and social selection. A key feature of fundamental theorems is that they have great simplicity and scope, which are often achieved by sacrificing perfect accuracy. Quantitative genetics has been more productive of fundamental theorems than population genetics, probably because its empirical focus on unknown genotypes freed it from the tyranny of detail and allowed it to focus on general issues.
Genotype, Models, Genetic, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, average excess, Models, Theoretical, Biological Evolution, Genetics, Population, evolution, Price equation, Selection, Genetic, breeder’s equation, Biology, fundamental theorem
Genotype, Models, Genetic, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, average excess, Models, Theoretical, Biological Evolution, Genetics, Population, evolution, Price equation, Selection, Genetic, breeder’s equation, Biology, fundamental theorem
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 105 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 1% |
