Table 6.

. | No parts benefit . | One part benefits . | Both parts benefit . |
---|---|---|---|

Layer 4 | 80.5% | 4.5% | 15.0% |

Layer 4 Shuffled | 89.3% | 2.7% | 8.0% |

p-value of difference | 0.041 | 0.214 | 0.033 |

p-value < 0.05 | Yes | No | Yes |

. | No parts benefit . | One part benefits . | Both parts benefit . |
---|---|---|---|

Layer 4 | 80.5% | 4.5% | 15.0% |

Layer 4 Shuffled | 89.3% | 2.7% | 8.0% |

p-value of difference | 0.041 | 0.214 | 0.033 |

p-value < 0.05 | Yes | No | Yes |

*Notes*. Shuffling decreases the probability that the component parts will both benefit from fusion; that is, the probability of symbiosis as persistent mutualism. The whole is fitter than both parts 15% of the time for Layer 4, but only 8% of the time for Layer 4 Shuffled. This shows that increased fitness does not come merely from the increase in area when fusing two seeds; a significant part of the increased fitness comes from the structural properties of the two seeds that are fused together. Layer 4 Shuffled is less likely to have the proper structure than Layer 4. The *p*-values in the table are calculated using a two-tailed Welch *t*-test for samples with unequal variance (heteroscedastic variance).

This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy. No content on this site may be used to train artificial intelligence systems without permission in writing from the MIT Press.