<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF 
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/"
>
    <channel rdf:about="http://quod.lib.umich.edu/p/ptb/longfeed.xml">
        <title>Philosophy and Theory in Biology</title>
        <link>http://www.philosophyandtheoryinbiology.org</link>
        <description>Philosophy and Theory in Biology</description>
        <items>
            <rdf:Seq>
				<rdf:li resource="http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.6959004.0004.001"/>
			</rdf:Seq>
        </items>
    </channel>
	<item rdf:about="http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.6959004.0004.001">
		<title>The Paradox of Sexual Reproduction and the Levels of Selection: Can Sociobiology Shed a Light?</title>
		<link>http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.6959004.0004.001</link>
		<dc:creator>Joachim Dagg</dc:creator>
		<dc:date>January 2012</dc:date>
		<description>The group selection controversy largely focuses on altruism (e.g., Wilson 1983; Lloyd 2001; Shavit 2004; Okasha 2006, 173ff; Borrello 2010; Leigh 2010; Rosas 2010; Hamilton and Dimond in press). Multilevel selection theory is a resolution of this controversy. Whereas kin selection partitions inclusive fitness into direct and indirect components (via influencing the replication of copies of genes in other individuals), multilevel selection considers within-group and between-group components of fitness (Gardner et al. 2011; Lion et al. 2011). Two scenarios of multilevel selection are often distinguished (Damuth and Heisler 1988; Okasha 2006; Pigliucci 2010): (1) group structure only divides individual fitnesses into within- and between-group components (MLS1); and, (2) groups get their own component of fitness and also, in most definitions,  a group-level adaptation (MLS2).</description>
		<prism:publicationName>Philosophy and Theory in Biology</prism:publicationName>
		<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
		<prism:number></prism:number>
	</item>
</rdf:RDF>

