Darwin vs Wallace: 150-year-old argument on evolution resolved by AI

Darwin vs Wallace: 150-year-old argument on evolution resolved by AI
Credit: Pixabay/ Maklay62

In the 1800s, a conflict between the founding fathers of evolution divided the community. Charles Darwin believed sexual selection drove the variation in butterfly colors and patterns of males, while contemporary rival Alfred Russel Wallace disagreed, predicting that broader natural selection played as important a role.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on sustainable agriculture, biomedicine, and other ‘disruptive’ innovations. Subscribe to our newsletter.

In 2024, 150 years or so after these two iconic British evolutionary scientists began their heated rivalry over who was right, researchers have employed machine learning to settle the score. Scientists from the University of Essex, in collaboration with the Natural History Museum and AI research institute Cross Labs, Cross Compass, have used AI to analyze “sexual and interspecific variation” found across 16,734 dorsal and ventral images of birdwing butterflies.

What they found was that, well, Darwin and Wallace were both correct in their predictions. The data suggests that while mate selection does drive changes in male butterfly appearance, changes observed in females over time indicate it’s not all about sex but broader selection. The Natural History Museum’s photographs, when analyzed, revealed that while the males often have the most distinct shape and pattern shifts, both sexes contribute to diversity on a broader scale.

This is an excerpt. Read the full article here

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot 2025-07-30 at 10.48
Can gene editing eliminate Down syndrome? Scientists have done it in lab-grown cells
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
ChatGPT-Image-May-26-2026-07_51_21-AM-2
Viewpoint: There are more than 1,000 chemicals in a cup of coffee—including many substances that can cause cancer. Why isn’t it banned?
Screenshot-2026-06-04-at-12.05.08-PM
Cases of brain inflammation surge as U.S. measles pandemic approaches 2000
Screenshot 2026-05-26 at 10.15
Viewpoint: Double standard—Why does the wellness industry get a free pass while Big Healthcare is treated as morally suspect?
Screenshot-2026-05-28-at-1.36.28-PM
Viewpoint: Can mRNA research survive the Trump administration?
Picture1
Sounds we can’t hear — the hidden planetary signals behind science, fear, and misinformation
downsyndrome_compilation_MID_1
CRISPR breakthrough that can remove the chromosome responsible for Down syndrome raises ethical questions
ChatGPT Image May 26, 2026, 08_42_17 AM (1)
Viewpoint: Greenpeace and poison: How environmental advocacy groups rely on compliant (and often ignorant) journalists to spread disinformation and spark litigation

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.