An incorrect definition of fitness revisited*

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Summary: I have attempted to show that a certain mistaken definition of fitness, which surfacesoccasionally, may turn out to have some merit. No claim is made that it is an improvement on, or should replace, the conventional definition of fitness; but it is different and has its own validity. Its generality is intriguing, its application is not limited either to selection or one locus models, and it may be easier to measure experimentally.The author wishes to express his thanks to Professors James Crow and Thomas Nagylaki and Mr William Engels for their most helpful comments and criticisms. Engels for their most helpful comments and criticisms.This research was sponsored by the National Institutes of Health (grant GM15422 09).