X-Message-Number: 12841
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 1999 10:27:22 -0400
From: Rand Simberg <>
Subject: Re: CryoNet #12821 - #12828

At 05:00 AM 11/24/99 -0500, you wrote: 


>
> All else being equal a long lived mouse would have more opportunity to mate
> and pass on more genes to another generation than his short lived cousin,
> but in the real would all else is not equal. It takes energy to keep in good
> running order for a long time and you'll probably be eaten by a cat before
> you get very old anyway, so the advantage is not great. 


Also, don't mice (at least the female ones) go through an rodentiary equivalent
of menopause?  I was assuming that mice only breed when young, and that there
is some date beyond which they don't.  My point was that any longevity beyond
the point that they reproduce and raise young would be of no interest to
evolution or their genes.  If they remain fertile indefinitely, then of course
the longer the better (at least until the resources run out).  Of course, if
the females go post menses, but the males retain their virility (as in humans)
then the pressure would be on the males only...

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12841