"True , and the confusion was my bad , as explained already . However , the fact of revertant mutation in eusocial bacteria colonies , as demonstrated by Ames and by Cairns , still shoots great big holes in the darwinist assumptions arising out of your old war-horses , Luria & amp ; Delbruck '43 , and its `` clone `` , Lederberg and Lederberg '52 ."
"Well , no , it does n't . That 's sort of the point of the article I linked to . No organismic response , no hypermutable state ( apart from one coincidentally arising in a minority of the adaptive population ) , no EAM . L & amp ; D , as an experiment , had its limitations , namely the lethality of the selective environment . What the article I linked to demonstrates is that Cairns & amp ; Foster also has limitations . Most of the time , it should be remembered , the C & amp ; F methodology yields the same results as L & amp ; D ; the circumstances yielding the anomalous results that were a temporary shot-in-the-arm for Lamarckism were very particular . The bacteria had to possess a leaky allele that still operated at a low efficiency , and that functionality had to be just barely inhibited by scavenger cells . C & amp ; F still did something useful : it highlighted the potential importance of amplification mutagenesis , where genes that do a slightly useful job accumulate under selection , increasing the chances that a more successful variant of the gene will arise within any given population . I 'll check out the other experiment you mention ; thanks for clearing that up ."
"the confusion was my bad mutation in eusocial bacteria colonies"
"sort of the point of the article temporary shot-in-the-arm"