Evolution is nonrandom even though mutation is random

Evidence

Avida also shatters the illusion that DNA is somehow “special” as a means of information transfer fueling evolutionary change. … The randomness of mutation has confused many people, since it implies that evolution also is random. (If evolution is random, how can exquisite adaptations be explained?) The trick lies in recognizing the difference between the source of variation—where the raw material necessary for evolution comes from—and what happens to this variation once it is there. Natural selection is anything but random. It’s no accident that weapons performing poorly are culled, while those performing well are retained and expanded. Given sufficient time and enough variation to work with, natural selection will push the evolution of weapons in directions that are anything but random. Consequently, new mutations infusing genetic variations into biological systems is random, but the evolution that subsequently unfolds in those populations very often is not. — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 888

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies the random-mutation vs nonrandom-selection distinction that confuses lay accounts of evolution.
• XREF: connects to: Mutation is random but the resulting evolutionary change is not.; Small founder samples cause random genetic drift in evolving populations — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 289; Replicated divergent selection populations rule out chance in evolution experiments — Emlen, Douglas J, Animal Weapons_ The Evolution of Battle, 293

Related

• Mutation is random but the resulting evolutionary change is not. (similarity 0.97)
• Small founder samples cause random genetic drift in evolving populations (similarity 0.82)
• Artificial selection directly tests whether populations evolve in response (similarity 0.81)
• Replicated divergent selection populations rule out chance in evolution experiments (similarity 0.81)
• Deliberate design generates new cultural variation faster and more constructively than random mutation (similarity 0.81)
• Small founder samples make artificial selection results vulnerable to chance (similarity 0.78)