No, unless the mechanisms by which these traits are acquired are inherited, subject to variation, and found in patterns of nested hierarchies.
Not well supported by the evidence and basically just assertion. Lamarck asserted that acquired characteristics, such as muscles developed during one's lifetime, were heritable. They are not. He also asserted that an organism had a " desire " to evolve. This was also not true.
Scientists do not prove things. Lamarck's theory is long refuted as acquired characteristics and the use and disuse concepts are not explanations for evolution of populations.
What is the mechanism that causes evolution. Both knew evolution occurred and occurs but did not know how or why. Lamark's " desire to evolve " and " acquired characteristics " failed to explain evolution. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection was the better explanation.
Jean-Baptiste Lamarck published his ideas on evolution in 1809 in a book titled "Philosophie Zoologique." In this book, he proposed the theory of inheritance of acquired characteristics, which suggested that organisms could pass down traits acquired during their lifetime to their offspring.
Darwin's explanation for the fact of evolution was better than Lamarck's explanation and fit the fact of evolution. Natural selection solved much of the species problem, but acquired characteristics did not have the empirical support and explained nothing in the end.
Acquired characteristics acquired during an organism's lifetime cannot be passed on to offspring according to modern evolutionary theory. Evolution is driven by genetic variations that are inherited and can lead to changes in a population over time through natural selection.
His two main concepts, acquired characteristics and a innate " desire " to evolve, were both unsupported by any evidence and were not the way evolution happens. So, Lamarck's " theory " ( in the vulgar sense ) was utterly refuted by the actual evidence and process of evolution.
No, acquired characteristics, such as building muscles through exercise, can not be passed onto the progeny and thus allele can not change over time in populations from acquired characteristics. The are not " hard " heritability.
Because acquired characteristics are not programmed in the DNA; only characterisitics which are genetically programmed are passed on and inherited.
Individuals are constantly evolving - False. Populations are constantly evolving - True. Evolution involves descent with modification - True. Acquired characteristics lead to evolution - False.
This is the theory of Lamarck and it is long refuted.
French naturalist who proposed that evolution resulted from the inheritance of acquired characteristics (1744-1829)
Not well supported by the evidence and basically just assertion. Lamarck asserted that acquired characteristics, such as muscles developed during one's lifetime, were heritable. They are not. He also asserted that an organism had a " desire " to evolve. This was also not true.
French naturalist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck's theory of evolution conflicted with Darwin's theory. Lamarck proposed that acquired characteristics could be passed down to offspring, while Darwin's theory emphasized natural selection and gradual change over generations.
Scientists do not prove things. Lamarck's theory is long refuted as acquired characteristics and the use and disuse concepts are not explanations for evolution of populations.
Larmark's theory was based on the idea that organisms inherited characteristics that they had acquired in life - so, if you have a scar your offspring will have scars. Darwin's theory assumed that offspring inherited characteristics from their parents, but they were more likely to survive to breed if there was advantage to those characteristics.
What is the mechanism that causes evolution. Both knew evolution occurred and occurs but did not know how or why. Lamark's " desire to evolve " and " acquired characteristics " failed to explain evolution. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection was the better explanation.