scholarly journals Biology's last paradigm shift. The transition from natural theology to Darwinism

PARADIGMI ◽  
2012 ◽  
pp. 45-58
Author(s):  
Massimo Pigliucci
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Natural Theology ◽  
Modern Synthesis ◽  
Extended Synthesis ◽  
The Future ◽  
Do So

Evolutionary theory went through several phases ever since the publication of the original Darwin-Wallace paper, including neo-Darwinism, the Modern Synthesis and, possibly, a currently ongoing Extended Synthesis. In this paper I tackle the question of whether evolutionary biology ever underwent anything like a Kuhn-style paradigm shift. I conclude that it did not, and is not likely to do so in the future, although a paradigmlike shift did occur early on, at the transition between natural theology and Darwinism. Parole chiave: Darwinismo, Paradigmi, Sintesi estesa, Sintesi moderna, Teologia naturale

scholarly journals Evolutionary biology today and the call for an extended synthesis

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 20160145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas J. Futuyma
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Epigenetic Inheritance ◽  
Reaction Norm ◽  
Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Extended Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Extended Synthesis ◽  
Proximate Causation

Evolutionary theory has been extended almost continually since the evolutionary synthesis (ES), but except for the much greater importance afforded genetic drift, the principal tenets of the ES have been strongly supported. Adaptations are attributable to the sorting of genetic variation by natural selection, which remains the only known cause of increase in fitness. Mutations are not adaptively directed, but as principal authors of the ES recognized, the material (structural) bases of biochemistry and development affect the variety of phenotypic variations that arise by mutation and recombination. Against this historical background, I analyse major propositions in the movement for an ‘extended evolutionary synthesis’. ‘Niche construction' is a new label for a wide variety of well-known phenomena, many of which have been extensively studied, but (as with every topic in evolutionary biology) some aspects may have been understudied. There is no reason to consider it a neglected ‘process’ of evolution. The proposition that phenotypic plasticity may engender new adaptive phenotypes that are later genetically assimilated or accommodated is theoretically plausible; it may be most likely when the new phenotype is not truly novel, but is instead a slight extension of a reaction norm already shaped by natural selection in similar environments. However, evolution in new environments often compensates for maladaptive plastic phenotypic responses. The union of population genetic theory with mechanistic understanding of developmental processes enables more complete understanding by joining ultimate and proximate causation; but the latter does not replace or invalidate the former. Newly discovered molecular phenomena have been easily accommodated in the past by elaborating orthodox evolutionary theory, and it appears that the same holds today for phenomena such as epigenetic inheritance. In several of these areas, empirical evidence is needed to evaluate enthusiastic speculation. Evolutionary theory will continue to be extended, but there is no sign that it requires emendation.

The Modern Synthesis

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vassiliki Betty Smocovitis
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Evolutionary Genetics ◽  
Modern Synthesis ◽  
Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
General Nature ◽  
Historical Event ◽  
Ernst Mayr ◽  
Synthetic View

The “modern synthesis” generally refers to the early to mid-century formulation of evolutionary theory that reconciled classical Darwinian selection theory with a newer population-oriented view of Mendelian genetics that attempted to explain the origin of biological diversity. It draws on the title of zoologist Julian S. Huxley’s book of 1943 titled Evolution: The Modern Synthesis, a semi-popular account of evolution that ushered in this “modern” synthetic view of evolution. Covering an interval of time approximately between 1920–1950, it also refers to developments in understanding evolution that drew on a range of disciplines that were synthesized or brought to consensus that generally include systematics, paleontology, and botany with a populational view of evolutionary genetics. Whether or not it served to unify the study of evolution, or to unify the disparate biological sciences—and whether or not it led to the emergence of a science of evolutionary biology, as some of its proponents have claimed—remains a topic for discussion. Though they do not refer to precisely the same things or share identical meanings, the phrase “modern synthesis” has overlapped with terms such as the “evolutionary synthesis,” coined and used especially by Ernst Mayr and William B. Provine, to refer to the historical event, as well as terms such as Neo-Darwinian theory or Neo-Darwinism (though criticism has been made regarding the latter term’s applicability to the mid-century developments in evolutionary theory). As Ernst Mayr noted, the term “Neo-Darwinism” was first coined and used by George John Romanes in 1895 to refer to a revision of Charles Darwin’s theory first formulated in 1859, which included Lamarckian inheritance. The extent to which the modern synthesis, and the evolutionary synthesis map with what is also called the synthetic theory, is open for discussion as is specific understanding of the term. For the most part, there is little in the way of consensus or agreement by scientists, philosophers, and historians as to what “the synthesis” (the abbreviated reference) precisely means, and what (if anything) specifically occurred of a general nature in studies of evolution, broadly construed, in the interval of time between 1920–1950.

scholarly journals Plant Evolutionary Ecology in the Age of the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis

2019 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 493-502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark E Olson
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Evolutionary Ecology ◽  
Plant Ecology ◽  
Modern Synthesis ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Extended Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Extended Synthesis ◽  
As Stress ◽  
Plant Ecological

AbstractPlant ecology is increasingly turning to evolutionary questions, just as evolutionary biology pushes out of the strictures of the Modern Synthesis into what some regard as an “Extended Evolutionary Synthesis.” As plant ecology becomes increasingly evolutionary, it is essential to ask how aspects of the Extended Synthesis might impinge on plant ecological theory and practice. I examine the contribution of plant evolutionary ecology to niche construction theory, as well as the potential for developmental systems theory and genes-as-followers adaptive evolution, all important post-Modern Synthesis themes, in providing novel perspectives for plant evolutionary ecology. I also examine ways that overcoming dichotomies such as “genetic vs. plastic” and “constraint vs. adaptation” provide fertile opportunities for plant evolutionary ecologists. Along the same lines, outgrowing vague concepts such as “stress” and replacing them with more precise terminology in all cases provides vastly increased causal clarity. As a result, the synthetic path that plant ecologists are blazing, becoming more evolutionary every year, bodes extremely well for the field, with vast potential for expansion into important scientific territory.

scholarly journals The structure of evolutionary theory: Beyond Neo-Darwinism, Neo-Lamarckism and biased historical narratives about the Modern Synthesis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Svensson
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Neutral Theory ◽  
Modern Synthesis ◽  
Third Way ◽  
Extended Evolutionary Synthesis ◽  
Stephen Jay Gould ◽  
Post Synthesis ◽  
Lasting Influence

The last decades have seen frequent calls for a more extended evolutionary synthesis (EES) that will supposedly overcome the limitations in the current evolutionary framework with its intellectual roots in the Modern Synthesis (MS). Some radical critics even want to entirely abandon the current evolutionary framework, claiming that the MS (often erroneously labelled “Neo-Darwinism”) is outdated, and will soon be replaced by an entirely new framework, such as the Third Way of Evolution (TWE). Such criticisms are not new, but have repeatedly re-surfaced every decade since the formation of the MS, and were particularly articulated by developmental biologist Conrad Waddington and paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. Waddington, Gould and later critics argued that the MS was too narrowly focused on genes and natural selection, and that it ignored developmental processes, epigenetics, paleontology and macroevolutionary phenomena. More recent critics partly recycle these old arguments and argue that non-genetic inheritance, niche construction, phenotypic plasticity and developmental bias necessitate major revision of evolutionary theory. Here I discuss these supposed challenges, taking a historical perspective and tracing these arguments back to Waddington and Gould. I dissect the old arguments by Waddington, Gould and more recent critics that the MS was excessively gene centric and became increasingly “hardened” over time and narrowly focused on natural selection. Recent critics have consciously or unconsciously exaggerated the long-lasting influence of the MS on contemporary evolutionary biology and have underestimated many post-Synthesis developments, particularly Neutral Theory and evolutionary quantitative genetics. Critics have also painted a biased picture of the MS as a more monolithic research tradition than it ever was, and have downplayed the pluralistic nature of contemporary evolutionary biology, particularly the long-lasting influence of Sewall Wright with his emphasis on gene interactions and stochasticity. Finally, I outline and visualize the conceptually split landscape of contemporary evolutionary biology, with four different stably coexisting analytical frameworks: adaptationism, mutationism, neutralism and selectionism. I suggest that the field can accommodate the challenges raised by critics, although structuralism (“EvoDevo”) and macroevolution remain to be conceptually integrated within mainstream evolutionary theory.

Waddington’s Processual Epigenetics and the Debate over Cryptic Variability

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flavia Fabris
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Variation ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Modern Synthesis ◽  
Genetic Assimilation ◽  
Ontological Difference ◽  
Epigenetic Process ◽  
Recent Debate ◽  
Acquired Characters

This chapter reappraises Waddington’s processual theory of epigenetics and examines its implications for contemporary evolutionary biology. It focuses in particular on the ontological difference between two conflicting assumptions that have been conflated in the recent debate over the nature of cryptic variability: a substance view that is consistent with the modern synthesis and construes variability as a preexisting pool of random genetic variation; and a processual view, which derives from Waddington’s conception of developmental canalization and understands variability as an epigenetic process. The chapter also discusses how these opposing interpretations fare in their capacity to explain the genetic assimilation of acquired characters.

Challenging the Modern Synthesis

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
21St Century ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Modern Synthesis ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Theory Of Evolution ◽  
Original Essays ◽  
New Biology ◽  
Conceptual Foundations ◽  
Orthodox View

Since its origin in the early 20th century, the modern synthesis theory of evolution has grown to represent the orthodox view on the process of organic evolution. It is a powerful and successful theory. Its defining features include the prominence it accords to genes in the explanation of development and inheritance, and the role of natural selection as the cause of adaptation. Since the advent of the 21st century, however, the modern synthesis has been subject to repeated and sustained challenges. In the last two decades, evolutionary biology has witnessed unprecedented growth in the understanding of those processes that underwrite the development of organisms and the inheritance of characters. The empirical advances usher in challenges to the conceptual foundations of evolutionary theory. Many current commentators charge that the new biology of the 21st century calls for a revision, extension, or wholesale rejection of the modern synthesis theory of evolution. Defenders of the modern synthesis maintain that the theory can accommodate the exciting new advances in biology, without forfeiting its central precepts. The original essays collected in this volume—by evolutionary biologists, philosophers of science, and historians of biology—survey and assess the various challenges to the modern synthesis arising from the new biology of the 21st century. Taken together, the essays cover a spectrum of views, from those that contend that the modern synthesis can rise to the challenges of the new biology, with little or no revision required, to those that call for the abandonment of the modern synthesis.

Big Questions in Ecology and Evolution

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas N. Sherratt ◽  
David M. Wilkinson
Keyword(s):  
Partial Solution ◽  
Fundamental Importance ◽  
Evolutionary Perspective ◽  
Text Book ◽  
Broad Audience ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Tropics ◽  
Made In ◽  
Do So

Why do we age? Why cooperate? Why do so many species engage in sex? Why do the tropics have so many species? When did humans start to affect world climate? This book provides an introduction to a range of fundamental questions that have taxed evolutionary biologists and ecologists for decades. Some of the phenomena discussed are, on first reflection, simply puzzling to understand from an evolutionary perspective, whilst others have direct implications for the future of the planet. All of the questions posed have at least a partial solution, all have seen exciting breakthroughs in recent years, yet many of the explanations continue to be hotly debated. Big Questions in Ecology and Evolution is a curiosity-driven book, written in an accessible way so as to appeal to a broad audience. It is very deliberately not a formal text book, but something designed to transmit the excitement and breadth of the field by discussing a number of major questions in ecology and evolution and how they have been answered. This is a book aimed at informing and inspiring anybody with an interest in ecology and evolution. It reveals to the reader the immense scope of the field, its fundamental importance, and the exciting breakthroughs that have been made in recent years.

scholarly journals Alternatives to and Reduction of Animal Use in Biomedical Research, Education and Testing

1990 ◽  
Vol 18 (1_part_1) ◽  
pp. 65-74
Author(s):  
John M. Frazier ◽  
Alan M. Goldberg
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Toxicity Testing ◽  
Research Education ◽  
New Methods ◽  
New Approaches ◽  
The Future ◽  
Technological Developments ◽  
Animal Use ◽  
Do So

Biomedical endeavours can be divided into three major categories: research, education, and testing. Within the context of each of these categories, activities involving whole animals have made major contributions and will continue to do so in the future. However, with technological developments in the areas of biotechnology and computers, new methods are already reducing the use of whole animals in certain areas. This article discusses the general issues of alternatives and then focuses on the development of new approaches to toxicity testing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document