Developmental Plasticity and Evolution

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Jane West-Eberhard
Keyword(s):  
Adaptive Evolution ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Developmental Plasticity ◽  
Higher Plants ◽  
Critical Discussion ◽  
Physiological Adaptation ◽  
Modular Organization ◽  
Random Mutation ◽  
Environmental Induction ◽  
Development And Evolution

The first comprehensive synthesis on development and evolution: it applies to all aspects of development, at all levels of organization and in all organisms, taking advantage of modern findings on behavior, genetics, endocrinology, molecular biology, evolutionary theory and phylogenetics to show the connections between developmental mechanisms and evolutionary change. This book solves key problems that have impeded a definitive synthesis in the past. It uses new concepts and specific examples to show how to relate environmentally sensitive development to the genetic theory of adaptive evolution and to explain major patterns of change. In this book development includes not only embryology and the ontogeny of morphology, sometimes portrayed inadequately as governed by "regulatory genes," but also behavioral development and physiological adaptation, where plasticity is mediated by genetically complex mechanisms like hormones and learning. The book shows how the universal qualities of phenotypes--modular organization and plasticity--facilitate both integration and change. Here you will learn why it is wrong to describe organisms as genetically programmed; why environmental induction is likely to be more important in evolution than random mutation; and why it is crucial to consider both selection and developmental mechanism in explanations of adaptive evolution. This book satisfies the need for a truly general book on development, plasticity and evolution that applies to living organisms in all of their life stages and environments. Using an immense compendium of examples on many kinds of organisms, from viruses and bacteria to higher plants and animals, it shows how the phenotype is reorganized during evolution to produce novelties, and how alternative phenotypes occupy a pivotal role as a phase of evolution that fosters diversification and speeds change. The arguments of this book call for a new view of the major themes of evolutionary biology, as shown in chapters on gradualism, homology, environmental induction, speciation, radiation, macroevolution, punctuation, and the maintenance of sex. No other treatment of development and evolution since Darwin's offers such a comprehensive and critical discussion of the relevant issues. Developmental Plasticity and Evolution is designed for biologists interested in the development and evolution of behavior, life-history patterns, ecology, physiology, morphology and speciation. It will also appeal to evolutionary paleontologists, anthropologists, psychologists, and teachers of general biology.

Development and evolution

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Maynard Smith ◽  
Eors Szathmary
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Recent Progress ◽  
Sound Production ◽  
Germ Line ◽  
Black Box ◽  
Developmental Genetics ◽  
Morphological Form ◽  
Molecular Information ◽  
Acquired Characters ◽  
Development And Evolution

In the nineteenth century, ideas about development, heredity and evolution were inextricably mixed up, because it seemed natural to suppose that changes that first occurred in development could become hereditary, and so could contribute to evolution. This was not only Lamarck’s view but Darwin’s, expressed in his theory of pangenesis. Weismann liberated us from this confusion, by arguing that information could pass from germ line to soma, but not from soma to germ line. If he was right, geneticists and evolutionary biologists could treat development as a black box: transmission genetics and evolution could be understood without first having to understand development. Since Weismann, developmental biology has had only a rather marginal impact on evolutionary biology. One day, we have promised ourselves, we will open the box, but for the time being we can get along very nicely without doing so. Recent progress in developmental genetics, some of which has been reviewed in the last three chapters, oblige us to reopen the question. In fact, there are three related questions, not one. The first, which is most relevant to the theme of this book, is the ‘levels of selection’ question: why does not selection between the cells of an organism disrupt integration at the level of the organism? This is the topic of section 15.2. The second is the problem of the inheritance of acquired characters. This old problem has reappeared in a new guise. We now recognize the existence of cell heredity, mediated by different mechanisms from those concerned with transmitting information between generations. In section 15.3, we discuss whether cell heredity plays any role in evolutionary change. Finally, in sections 15.4 and 15.5, we ask whether recent molecular information sheds any light on another old problem—that of the extraordinary conservatism of morphological form, maintained despite dramatic changes of function. This conservatism has led anatomists to identify a small number of basic archetypes, or bauplans. There is little doubt that conservatism is real. Consider, for example, the fact that bones and cartilages, which in humans serve in swallowing, sound production and hearing, are derived from elements of the gill apparatus whereby our fish ancestors exchanged gases with seawater, and, before that, in all probability, from elements of a filter-feeding apparatus.

Assessment

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Jane West-Eberhard
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Developmental Plasticity ◽  
Phenotypic Traits ◽  
Phase Polymorphism ◽  
Aesthetic Sense ◽  
Adaptive Assessment ◽  
Important Barrier ◽  
Symbiotic Microorganism ◽  
Adaptive Developmental Plasticity ◽  
Adaptive Switch

A book on developmental plasticity needs a chapter on assessment, if only to show that adaptive environmental assessment occurs. Skepticism regarding the ability of nonhuman organisms to assess conditions well enough to make adaptive decisions has a long history in evolutionary biology, and it has been an important barrier to understanding the evolution of adaptive developmental plasticity. It is worth briefly reviewing this history in order to understand certain preconceptions about assessment that still persist. In the nineteenth century, critics of Darwin’s theory of sexual selection (Darwin, 1871) balked at the idea of an “aesthetic sense” in lowly creatures that would enable female choice of mates (representative papers are reprinted and discussed in Bajema, 1984). Later, the barrier persisted for other reasons. Even though naturalists routinely used the condition-appropriate expression of phenotypic traits to support adaptation hypotheses—a practice that assumes adaptive assessment of conditions as it is defined here—theoretically inclined biologists paid little attention to the question of facultatively expressed traits. Part of the difficulty lay in the problem of explaining how adaptive assessment could evolve within the framework of conventional genetics. Theodosius Dobzhansky, one of the twentieth century’s leading evolutionary biologists, acknowledged this unresolved problem in remarks following a lecture by J. S. Kennedy on the phase polyphenisms of migratory locusts (Kennedy, 1961). Dobzhansky referred to the “challenge to a geneticist” of explaining the adaptive switch between the sedentary and the migratory phenotypes of the locusts, which had been shown to be largely independent of genotype. He suggested that an extrachromosomal factor may be involved, a symbiotic microorganism that acts as a “plasmagene” whose multiplication would eventually stimulate phase change. Although Dobzhansky’s proposal was no more preposterous than some of the regulatory devices that have actually been discovered, Kennedy (1961) minced no words in his reply to this suggestion: . . . [W]e need not feel obliged to invoke a second organism to explain [phase polymorphism] unless we are reluctant to concede an important part to the environment as well as to heredity in moulding development. . . .

Ecological approaches to perceptual learning: learning to perceive and perceiving as learning

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 363-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnes Szokolszky ◽  
Catherine Read ◽  
Zsolt Palatinus ◽  
Kinga Palatinus
Keyword(s):  
Language Development ◽  
Perceptual Learning ◽  
Tool Use ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Ecological Psychology ◽  
Current Theory ◽  
Review Article ◽  
The Core ◽  
Core Concepts ◽  
Development And Evolution

In this theoretical review article, our primary goal is to contribute to the post-cognitivist understanding of learning to perceive and perceiving as learning, by discussing a framework for perception and perceptual learning initiated by James J Gibson, and extended by Eleanor J Gibson and others. This Ecological Psychology has a coherent set of assumptions based on the concept of mutualism between the perceiving organism and its surroundings, and the idea of affordances as action possibilities of the surround that are perceptible by the organism. At the same time, Ecological Psychology, broadly construed, consists of different perspectives that take different routes to address questions related to the core concepts of perceptual learning. In this article, we focus on three theoretical stances within Ecological Psychology on the issue of perceptual learning: that of Eleanor J Gibson, the current theory of direct learning by Jacobs and Michaels, and the “organicist” approach based on ideas of organicist biology and developments in evolutionary biology. We consider perceptual learning as embedded in development and evolution, and we explore perceptual learning in more depth in the context of tool use and language development. We also discuss the relation between Ecological Psychology and Enactivism on the nature of perception. In conclusion, we summarize the benefits of Ecological Psychology, as a robust but still developing post-cognitivist framework, for the study of perceptual learning and cognitive science in general.

scholarly journals Integrated structural and evolutionary analysis reveals common mechanisms underlying adaptive evolution in mammals

2020 ◽  
Vol 117 (11) ◽  
pp. 5977-5986 ◽  
Author(s):  
Greg Slodkowicz ◽  
Nick Goldman
Keyword(s):  
Positive Selection ◽  
Adaptive Evolution ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Molecular Mechanisms ◽  
Structural Information ◽  
Protein Structures ◽  
Unexpected Finding ◽  
Evolutionary Analysis ◽  
Genomic Scale ◽  
Evolution Of Mammals

Understanding the molecular basis of adaptation to the environment is a central question in evolutionary biology, yet linking detected signatures of positive selection to molecular mechanisms remains challenging. Here we demonstrate that combining sequence-based phylogenetic methods with structural information assists in making such mechanistic interpretations on a genomic scale. Our integrative analysis shows that positively selected sites tend to colocalize on protein structures and that positively selected clusters are found in functionally important regions of proteins, indicating that positive selection can contravene the well-known principle of evolutionary conservation of functionally important regions. This unexpected finding, along with our discovery that positive selection acts on structural clusters, opens previously unexplored strategies for the development of better models of protein evolution. Remarkably, proteins where we detect the strongest evidence of clustering belong to just two functional groups: Components of immune response and metabolic enzymes. This gives a coherent picture of pathogens and xenobiotics as important drivers of adaptive evolution of mammals.

scholarly journals Does Adaptive Protein Evolution Proceed by Large or Small Steps at the Amino Acid Level?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juraj Bergman ◽  
Adam Eyre-Walker
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acids ◽  
Adaptive Evolution ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Amino Acid Level ◽  
Neutral Evolution ◽  
Relative Contribution ◽  
Mutational Step ◽  
Genome Wide ◽  
Genome Wide Data ◽  
Evolution Of Proteins

AbstractA longstanding question in evolutionary biology is the relative contribution of large and small effect mutations to the adaptive process. We have investigated this question in proteins by estimating the rate of adaptive evolution between all pairs of amino acids separated by one mutational step using a McDonald-Kreitman type approach and genome-wide data from several Drosophila species. We find that the rate of adaptive evolution is higher amongst amino acids that are more similar. This is partly due to the fact that the proportion of mutations that are adaptive is higher amongst more similar amino acids. We also find that the rate of neutral evolution between amino acids is higher amongst similar amino acids. Overall our results suggest that both the adaptive and non-adaptive evolution of proteins is dominated by substitutions between amino acids that are more similar.

scholarly journals Probing the Response of the Amphibious Plant Butomus umbellatus to Nutrient Enrichment and Shading by Integrating Eco-Physiological With Metabolomic Analyses

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paraskevi Manolaki ◽  
Georgia Tooulakou ◽  
Caroline Urup Byberg ◽  
Franziska Eller ◽  
Brian K. Sorrell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nutrient Enrichment ◽  
Higher Plants ◽  
Profile Analysis ◽  
Light Availability ◽  
Biomass Accumulation ◽  
Physiological Adaptation ◽  
Gas Chromatography Mass Spectrometry ◽  
Physiological Parameter ◽  
Natural Ecosystem ◽  
Amphibious Plants

Amphibious plants, living in land-water ecotones, have to cope with challenging and continuously changing growth conditions in their habitats with respect to nutrient and light availability. They have thus evolved a variety of mechanisms to tolerate and adapt to these changes. Therefore, the study of these plants is a major area of ecophysiology and environmental ecological research. However, our understanding of their capacity for physiological adaptation and tolerance remains limited and requires systemic approaches for comprehensive analyses. To this end, in this study, we have conducted a mesocosm experiment to analyze the response of Butomus umbellatus, a common amphibious species in Denmark, to nutrient enrichment and shading. Our study follows a systematic integration of morphological (including plant height, leaf number, and biomass accumulation), ecophysiological (photosynthesis-irradiance responses, leaf pigment content, and C and N content in plant organs), and leaf metabolomic measurements using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (39 mainly primary metabolites), based on bioinformatic methods. No studies of this type have been previously reported for this plant species. We observed that B. umbellatus responds to nutrient enrichment and light reduction through different mechanisms and were able to identify its nutrient enrichment acclimation threshold within the applied nutrient gradient. Up to that threshold, the morpho-physiological response to nutrient enrichment was profound, indicating fast-growing trends (higher growth rates and biomass accumulation), but only few parameters changed significantly from light to shade [specific leaf area (SLA); quantum yield (φ)]. Metabolomic analysis supported the morpho-physiological results regarding nutrient overloading, indicating also subtle changes due to shading not directly apparent in the other measurements. The combined profile analysis revealed leaf metabolite and morpho-physiological parameter associations. In this context, leaf lactate, currently of uncertain role in higher plants, emerged as a shading acclimation biomarker, along with SLA and φ. The study enhances both the ecophysiology methodological toolbox and our knowledge of the adaptive capacity of amphibious species. It demonstrates that the educated combination of physiological with metabolomic measurements using bioinformatic approaches is a promising approach for ecophysiology research, enabling the elucidation of discriminatory metabolic shifts to be used for early diagnosis and even prognosis of natural ecosystem responses to climate change.

scholarly journals Tell Me Where You’ve Been and I’ll Tell You How You’ll Evolve

mBio ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Fumasoni
Keyword(s):  
High Temperatures ◽  
Adaptive Evolution ◽  
Experimental Evolution ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Genetic Basis ◽  
Microbial Populations ◽  
Evolutionary Processes ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Selection Experiments ◽  
Evolutionary Trajectories

ABSTRACT The reproducibility of adaptive evolution is a long-standing debate in evolutionary biology. Kempher et al. (M. L. Kempher, X. Tao, R. Song, B. Wu, et al., mBio 11:e00569-20, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00569-20) used experimental evolution to investigate the effect of previous evolutionary trajectories on the ability of microbial populations to adapt to high temperatures. Despite the divergence caused by adaptation to previous environments, all populations reproducibly converged on similar final levels of fitness. Nevertheless, the genetic basis of adaptation depended on past selection experiments, reinforcing the idea that previous adaptation can dictate the trajectories of later evolutionary processes.

scholarly journals HMGA Genes and Proteins in Development and Evolution

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 654 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Vignali ◽  
Silvia Marracci
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Cell Biology ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
High Mobility ◽  
High Mobility Group ◽  
Present Review ◽  
Regulatory Factors ◽  
Group A ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Development And Evolution

HMGA (high mobility group A) (HMGA1 and HMGA2) are small non-histone proteins that can bind DNA and modify chromatin state, thus modulating the accessibility of regulatory factors to the DNA and contributing to the overall panorama of gene expression tuning. In general, they are abundantly expressed during embryogenesis, but are downregulated in the adult differentiated tissues. In the present review, we summarize some aspects of their role during development, also dealing with relevant studies that have shed light on their functioning in cell biology and with emerging possible involvement of HMGA1 and HMGA2 in evolutionary biology.

Principles of Development and Evolution

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Jane West-Eberhard
Keyword(s):  
General Framework ◽  
Developmental Plasticity ◽  
Developmental Change ◽  
Gradual Improvement ◽  
Population Extinction ◽  
Founder Populations ◽  
New Gene ◽  
New Situation ◽  
Development And Evolution

So far, I have outlined the general properties of phenotypes, shown how they relate to development, and presented a model of adaptive evolution based on established principles of development and genetics. Now, using this general framework, I can summarize how developmental plasticity facilitates evolution. Jacob (1977) characterized evolution as “tinkering.” It shuffles and recombines what is already there. Frazzetta (1975), in another felicitous comparison with machines, wrote that evolution manages “the gradual improvement of a machine while it is running” (p. 20). Both of these qualities are possible due to characteristics of phenotypes that are not shared with most machines. Tinkering works because the phenotype is made of recombinable modular components that can be turned off and on in different conditions and can function in more than one context, what Gerhart and Kirshner (1997; Kirschner and Gerhart, 1998) call “weak linkage” to any particular use. Improvement without disruption of function works because of the remarkable active flexibility, and redundancy, in the development of parts. As a result of these two qualities—modularity and plasticity—an organism has the unmachinelike ability to respond to a new situation or to a new gene with the production of a new trait, and then to multiply, through reproduction, the ability to produce this trait. Differential reproduction starts the cycle of variation, selection, and cross-generational change that we call evolution—the most unmachinelike process of all. Many reasons have been given to believe that evolutionary change is difficult and even resisted in a well-adapted population (see chapter 1). The evolution of a novel specialization requires that a single lineage persist while undergoing extensive change. The conditions sometimes mentioned as favoring directional evolution, such as strong competition, very different or changing environments, small founder populations, or very long periods of time (see Mayr, 1982b), also favor population extinction. The idea of developmental cohesiveness, outlined in chapter 1, led to the further belief that major developmental change early in ontogeny would be disruptive. The cohesiveness theme persists even though it long has been clear that innovation does not occur exclusively by terminal addition (see chapter 1).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document