User talk:Larry.monocello/sandbox

Hi Larry,

A few suggestions for you:


 * You would be better using a bulleted list (like this one)
 * You need a colon at the end of "The following hypotheses explore the role of evolution in dichromatism."
 * Citations go after punctuation such as a comma or a full stop (period).
 * "Other studies suggest a dichromat advantage in mesopic vision, night vision and fishing". Fishing sounds out of place here - you need to say what the visual advantage is that leads to this.
 * "do not suffer from “chromatic noise" Do trichromats "suffer" from chromatic noise? This needs rewording.
 * "Because the only genetic difference between a dichromat and a trichromat is in the opsin genes." is not a complete sentence. Richerman ''   (talk) 13:36, 23 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your suggestions! I'm working on them. I'm not sure how to transfer the information into a bulleted list (in terms of logical flow, not coding), though. Could you give me an example? Larry.monocello (talk) 16:22, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I was thinking of something like the following as I think it makes it clearer what the hypotheses are - see what you think. Richerman ''   (talk) 20:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Evolutionary Considerations
The following hypotheses explore the role of evolution in dichromatism:
 * Adaptation - During the Second World War, the U.S. Army discovered that colorblind soldiers could distinguish camouflaged targets better than their counterparts with color vision could. Further studies have shown that dichromats are better at detecting camouflaged targets in which the object’s color accounts for differences in texture between the object and its surroundings, can more easily identify edges, have sharper vision, and do not suffer from “chromatic noise.” Other studies suggest a dichromat advantage in mesopic vision and fishing. As a result, dichromats may have an advantage over trichromats in detecting some kinds of prey, which could explain higher rate of dichromatism in relation to other defects.


 * Evolutionary Legacy - Another hypothesis posits that the high frequency of dichromatism in humans is due to a relaxation of pressure for trichromats in societies that have been traditionally pastoral and agricultural. Because color vision is less important to survival in these societies, positive selection for trichromatism would be relaxed . Because the only genetic difference between a dichromat and a trichromat is in the opsin genes . In agricultural-pastoral societies, the ancestral dichromat phenotype not being a reproductive hindrance (and therefore not being subject to negative selection)—but rather the newer trichromat phenotype merely being more advantageous in pre-agricultural societies (subject to positive selection)—accounts for the relatively high frequency of dichromatism in these societies.


 * Aah I get it now. Thank you so much for your help! Larry.monocello (talk) 20:24, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I could have made that clearer. I've found the abstract of the Jagle/de Luca paper here and it says "Multi-gene dichromats may benefit from a reduction in chromatic aberration and chromatic noise in the high acuity channel". That's not quite the same as you said above which says that it's all dichromats and they don't see any noise at all. Richerman ''  (talk) 22:09, 26 October 2013 (UTC)