In the end, when I considered their insistence that the intrinsic rate of increase must be measured at the population level, I felt they did not understand our interest in how natural selection, acting during population growth, influences genetic composition. They insist on comparing the intrinsic rates of natural increase between populations without considering the effects of density dependence, genetic composition, and other factors. I do not think they are interested at all in changes to the...
Second, let us accept that the intrinsic rate of increase is an appropriate measure of genotype fitness under density-independent conditions. Now, suppose we are trying to measure the intrinsic rate of increase of a genotype. To create density-independent conditions in the laboratory, where a population can grow without density constraints, it is easy to see that for a highly reproductive species like Drosophila melanogaster, we must start with a small population size. In this situation, I...
First, as my professor in Edinburgh discussed, population genetics models have shown that the intrinsic rate of natural growth, rij, defined as the real root of the Euler-Lotka equation, is, in many cases, an appropriate measure of fitness for the diploid genotype 𝑖𝑗 under density-independent conditions, where the population can grow without density constraints. Fitness is usually defined at the individual level unless one is considering group or population selection. Of course, for...
Their criticism and my rebuttal What I found most difficult to understand was that they attacked my paper published in 2003. However, as I have explained at length, after publishing that paper, I went on to publish several more papers before their critique was published in 2011. Therefore, I had no idea why they went out of their way to single out my 2003 paper for criticism. They probably had not read my later papers. If they had reached out to me directly, I would have likely asked them to...
Fortunately, he replied to my email promptly and even attached the PDF. Since I had already read the paper, I immediately sent him a relatively long email addressing his criticism of my research, though in a rather general manner. However, after that, there was no correspondence for about half a year. He may have thought I was a troublesome person, but in such cases, I believe it is an ironclad rule to respond as quickly as possible. Otherwise, since I am also considering every possible way to...
Email correspondence I still have the emails we exchanged at that time. According to them, I sent my first email to the author of the paper on November 29, 2016. Someone I did not know criticized my research without my knowledge and published their critique in a paper. I am not sure how other researchers would react, but personally, I found the authors of that paper to be very rude and unfair to me. Therefore, as a courtesy, I asked the author of that paper to send me a PDF of it, intending to...
The paper I published in 2003 was criticized in a paper published in 2011, but I only discovered this five years later, at the end of 2016. I felt uneasy about my research being criticized in that paper. However, even if I was criticized, as long as I had done what I believed to be right, I felt it was my responsibility as a researcher to refute the criticism. Therefore, I ultimately decided to contact the author of the paper. I needed to make him acknowledge that his criticism was misplaced....
In the paper on DDT resistance discussed in the previous section, I believed I had compiled all the remaining unpublished results from my research at the University of Tsukuba. I thought I would no longer be publishing on insecticide resistance. Therefore, as mentioned earlier, I shifted my focus to evolutionary genetics research and discussions on elderly care, while also helping care for my grandmother and working part-time as a caregiver at an elderly care facility to support myself. I no...
Addressing criticisms of my research Criticisms of my research found in a paper I have primarily written papers based on the results of experiments I conducted during my time in the Graduate School of the University of Tsukuba. So far, I have published 11 papers on insecticide resistance. When a manuscript is submitted to a journal, it is typically sent to two or three reviewers for critical evaluation. Ultimately, the editor decides whether to accept the paper based on the referees'...
My research on genetic variation in insecticide resistance within natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster, which I had been conducting since my time in the Graduate School of the University of Tsukuba, could only progress up to this point. I hope that further research will be conducted and that meaningful findings will be obtained in the future. The abstract of the submitted paper is provided below. The genetic architecture of insecticide resistance within a natural population of...