Super Soldier Ants and (Lack of) Evolution

There is a fascinating article at the following website: http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2012/01/06/sci-supersolider-ants.html

The first thing that is fascinating is the biology itself. To learn that there are genes common to many ants is very interesting. That these genes are typically not expressed but can be induced by applying hormones to a larva is also interesting.

But what is more fascinating is the interpretation of the research by the scientists. Note this sentence from the article:

"The authors suggest that hanging on to ancestral developmental toolkits can be an important way for organisms to evolve new physical traits."

“[E]volve new physical traits”? The paragraph before said that the study showed “dormant genetic potential that can be invoked by changes in the environment”. Dormant genetic potential does not show evolution. True, the species of ants that the scientists induced to produce super soldiers previously did not produce super soldiers. But if the genes for super soldiers were already present and all that was needed was to stimulate the genes, it is not true to say that a new trait evolved. The information for the trait was already there, so there was no true evolution occurring.

The fact that this study showed that super soldier genes were present in these ants demonstrates that many ants have a common set of genes. Having pre-existing common genes is not consistent with evolution because no new genetic information was generated. However, pre-exiting genes is very consistent with the concept of kinds. If ants all belong to the same kind, we would expect that the same genes would be found in most ants, even if those genes are not being expressed by a particular species. The results of this study can just as easily be used to promote the idea that ants belong to a single kind that was Divinely created, unique and separate from all other kinds.

This study is very interesting, because it shows the potential for the environment to stimulate the development of latent traits that previously had not been expressed. What it does not show is the evolution of a new trait. That interpretation was read into the results by the researchers.