Understanding Bias in the Introduction of Variation as an Evolutionary Cause

A. Stoltzfus
{"title":"Understanding Bias in the Introduction of Variation as an Evolutionary Cause","authors":"A. Stoltzfus","doi":"10.7551/mitpress/11693.003.0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our understanding of evolution is shaped strongly by how we conceive of its fundamental causes. In the original Modern Synthesis, evolution was defined as a process of shifting the frequencies of available alleles at many loci affecting a trait under selection. Events of mutation that introduce novelty were not considered evolutionary causes, but proximate causes acting at the wrong level. Today it is clear that long-term evolutionary dynamics depend on the dynamics of mutational introduction. Yet, the implications of this dependency remain unfamiliar, and have not yet penetrated into high-level debates over evolutionary theory. Modeling the influence of biases in the introduction process reveals behavior previously unimagined, as well as behavior previously considered impossible. Quantitative biases in the introduction of variation can impose biases on the outcome of evolution without requiring high mutation rates or neutral evolution. Mutation-biased adaptation, a possibility not previously imagined, has been observed among diverse taxa. Directional trends are possible under a sustained bias. Biases that are developmental in origin may have an effect analogous to mutational biases. Structuralist arguments invoking the relative accessibility of forms in state-space can be understood as references to the role of biases in the introduction of variation. That is, the characteristic concerns of molecular evolution, evo-devo and structuralism can be interpreted to implicate a kind of causation absent from the original Modern Synthesis.","PeriodicalId":415630,"journal":{"name":"Evolutionary Causation","volume":"122 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evolutionary Causation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11693.003.0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Our understanding of evolution is shaped strongly by how we conceive of its fundamental causes. In the original Modern Synthesis, evolution was defined as a process of shifting the frequencies of available alleles at many loci affecting a trait under selection. Events of mutation that introduce novelty were not considered evolutionary causes, but proximate causes acting at the wrong level. Today it is clear that long-term evolutionary dynamics depend on the dynamics of mutational introduction. Yet, the implications of this dependency remain unfamiliar, and have not yet penetrated into high-level debates over evolutionary theory. Modeling the influence of biases in the introduction process reveals behavior previously unimagined, as well as behavior previously considered impossible. Quantitative biases in the introduction of variation can impose biases on the outcome of evolution without requiring high mutation rates or neutral evolution. Mutation-biased adaptation, a possibility not previously imagined, has been observed among diverse taxa. Directional trends are possible under a sustained bias. Biases that are developmental in origin may have an effect analogous to mutational biases. Structuralist arguments invoking the relative accessibility of forms in state-space can be understood as references to the role of biases in the introduction of variation. That is, the characteristic concerns of molecular evolution, evo-devo and structuralism can be interpreted to implicate a kind of causation absent from the original Modern Synthesis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
理解偏差在引入变异作为进化原因中的作用
我们对进化的理解很大程度上取决于我们对其基本原因的理解。在最初的《现代综合》中,进化被定义为在选择下影响一个性状的许多位点上,改变可用等位基因频率的过程。引入新颖性的突变事件不被认为是进化的原因,而是在错误的水平上起作用的近因。今天,很明显,长期的进化动力学取决于突变引入的动力学。然而,这种依赖性的含义仍然不为人所知,并且尚未渗透到进化论的高层辩论中。对介绍过程中偏见影响的建模揭示了以前无法想象的行为,以及以前认为不可能的行为。引入变异时的数量偏差可以对进化结果施加偏差,而不需要高突变率或中性进化。突变偏向适应,一种以前没有想象到的可能性,已经在不同的分类群中观察到。在持续的偏差下,定向趋势是可能的。源于发展的偏见可能会产生类似于突变偏见的影响。结构主义的论点援引状态空间中形式的相对可及性,可以理解为偏差在引入变化中的作用。也就是说,分子进化、进化和结构主义的特征可以被解释为隐含着一种原现代综合论所没有的因果关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Understanding Bias in the Introduction of Variation as an Evolutionary Cause Decoupling, Commingling, and the Evolutionary Significance of Experiential Niche Construction The Shape of Things to Come: Evo Devo Perspectives on Causes and Consequences in Evolution Biological Dynamics and Evolutionary Causation Biological Information in Developmental and Evolutionary Systems
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1