Theory in Biosciences最新文献

The present study provides new insight into the key aspects of the early formative period of the ecosystem concept in aquatic ecology. Raymond Lindeman’s trophodynamics is known to be a starting point for the development of the modern concept of ecosystem. The trophodynamic approach in ecology was proposed by Lindeman in his widely cited paper of 1942. Lindeman’s views are analyzed in comparison with the contemporary production studies in aquatic ecology. It is shown that a similar theoretical system has been proposed in the USSR at the end of the 1930s by Georgiy G. Vinberg. He introduced the concept of biotic balance based on the wide appraisal of the dark and light bottles method. The study shows that both Lindeman’s trophodynamics and Vinberg’s concept of biotic balance relied on an energy-based approach in considering the wholeness of a water body. The two scientists, however, differed in several important aspects concerning the interpretation of the role of living organisms. The holistic interpretation of ecosystem by Lindeman and Vinberg can be seen as part of the dilemma between physicalism and organicism. At the same time, the main emphasis in the concepts of both Vinberg and Lindemann was on the primary production component, a feature that was common to the first holistic systems in production hydrobiology (e.g., E. Naumann’s regional limnology). It is clear that modern problems of aquatic ecology should be addressed from the perspective of the organismocentric understanding of the ecosystem, but undoubtedly at the new level of development of this view.

In this paper, we investigate the asymptotic behavior of a modified chemostat model. We first demonstrate the existence of equilibria. Then, we present a mathematical analysis for the model, the invariance, the positivity, the persistence of the solutions, and the asymptotic global stability of the interior equilibrium. Some numerical simulations are carried out to illustrate the main results.

Counting transcripts of mRNA are a key method of observation in modern biology. With advances in counting transcripts in single cells (single-cell RNA sequencing or scRNA-seq), these data are routinely used to identify cells by their transcriptional profile, and to identify genes with differential cellular expression. Because the total number of transcripts counted per cell can vary for technical reasons, the first step of many commonly used scRNA-seq workflows is to normalize by sequencing depth, transforming counts into proportional abundances. The primary objective of this step is to reshape the data such that cells with similar biological proportions of transcripts end up with similar transformed measurements. But there is growing concern that normalization and other transformations result in unintended distortions that hinder both analyses and the interpretation of results. This has led to an intense focus on optimizing methods for normalization and transformation of scRNA-seq data. Here, we take an alternative approach, by avoiding normalization and transformation altogether. We abandon the use of distances to compare cells, and instead use a restricted algebra, motivated by measurement theory and abstract algebra, that preserves the count nature of the data. We demonstrate that this restricted algebra is sufficient to draw meaningful and practical comparisons of gene expression through the use of the dot product and other elementary operations. This approach sidesteps many of the problems with common transformations, and has the added benefit of being simpler and more intuitive. We implement our approach in the package countland, available in python and R.

A two-patch logistic metapopulation model is investigated both analytically and numerically focusing on the impact of dispersal on population dynamics. First, the dependence of the global dynamics on the stability type of the full extinction equilibrium point is tackled. Then, the behaviour of the total population with respect to the dispersal is studied analytically. Our findings demonstrate that diffusion plays a crucial role in the preservation of both subpopulations and the full metapopulation under the presence of stochastic perturbations. At low diffusion, the origin is a repulsor, causing the orbits to flow nearly parallel to the axes, risking stochastic extinctions. Higher diffusion turns the repeller into a saddle point. Orbits then quickly converge to the saddle's unstable manifold, reducing extinction chances. This change in the vector field enhances metapopulation robustness. On the other hand, the well-known fact that asymmetric conditions on the patches is beneficial for the total population is further investigated. This phenomenon has been studied in previous works for large enough or small enough values of the dispersal. In this work, we complete the theory for all values of the dispersal. In particular, we derive analytically a formula for the optimal value of the dispersal that maximizes the total population.

In 1913, the geneticist William Bateson called for a halt in studies of genetic phenomena until evolutionary fundamentals had been sufficiently addressed at the molecular level. Nevertheless, in the 1960s, the theoretical population geneticists celebrated a "modern synthesis" of the teachings of Mendel and Darwin, with an exclusive role for natural selection in speciation. This was supported, albeit with minor reservations, by historians Mark Adams and William Provine, who taught it to generations of students. In subsequent decades, doubts were raised by molecular biologists and, despite the deep influence of various mentors, Adams and Provine noted serious anomalies and began to question traditional "just-so-stories." They were joined in challenging the genetic orthodoxy by a scientist-historian, Donald Forsdyke, who suggested that a "collective variation" postulated by Darwin's young research associate, George Romanes, and a mysterious "residue" postulated by Bateson, might relate to differences in short runs of DNA bases (oligonucleotides). The dispute between a small network of historians and a large network of geneticists can be understood in the context of national politics. Contrasts are drawn between democracies, where capturing the narrative makes reversal difficult, and dictatorships, where overthrow of a supportive dictator can result in rapid reversal.

Mathematical models of cancer and bacterial evolution have generally stemmed from a gene-centric framework, assuming clonal evolution via acquisition of resistance-conferring mutations and selection of their corresponding subpopulations. More recently, the role of phenotypic plasticity has been recognized and models accounting for phenotypic switching between discrete cell states (e.g., epithelial and mesenchymal) have been developed. However, seldom do models incorporate both plasticity and mutationally driven resistance, particularly when the state space is continuous and resistance evolves in a continuous fashion. In this paper, we develop a framework to model plastic and mutational mechanisms of acquiring resistance in a continuous gradual fashion. We use this framework to examine ways in which cancer and bacterial populations can respond to stress and consider implications for therapeutic strategies. Although we primarily discuss our framework in the context of cancer and bacteria, it applies broadly to any system capable of evolving via plasticity and genetic evolution.

In recent years, some scholars have explicitly questioned the desirability or utility of applying the classical and "old-fashioned" theories of scientific change by the likes of Karl Popper and Thomas S. Kuhn to the question of the precise nature and significance of the extended evolutionary synthesis (EES). Supposedly, these twentieth-century philosophers are completely irrelevant for a better understanding of this new theoretical framework for the study of evolution. Here, it will be argued that the EES can be fruitfully interpreted in terms of, as yet, insufficiently considered or even overlooked elements from Kuhn's theory. First, in his original, historical philosophy of science, Kuhn not only distinguished between small and big scientific revolutions, he also pointed out that paradigms can be extended and reformulated. In contrast with what its name suggests, the mainstream EES can be interpreted as a Kuhnian reformulation of modern evolutionary theory. Second, it has, as yet, also been overlooked that the EES can be interpreted in terms of Kuhn's later, tentative evolutionary philosophy of science. With the EES, an old dichotomy in evolutionary biology is maybe being formalized and institutionalized.

A biosemiotic approach to the interpretation of morphological data is apt to highlight morphological traits that have hitherto gone unnoticed for their crucial roles in intraspecific sign interpretation and communication processes. Examples of such traits include specific genital structures found in the haplogyne spiders Dysdera erythrina (Walckenaer 1802) and Dysdera crocata (Koch 1838). In both D. erythrina and D. crocata, the distal sclerite of the male bulb and the anterior diverticulum of the female endogyne exhibit a striking, previously unreported correspondence in size and shape, allowing for a precise match between these structures during copulation. In D. erythrina, the sclerite at the tip of the bulb and the anterior diverticulum are semi-circular in shape, whereas in D. crocata they are rectangular. From the perspective of biosemiotics, which studies the production and interpretation of signs and codes in living systems, these structures are considered the morphological zones of an intraspecific sign interpretation process. This process constitutes one of the necessary prerequisites for sperm transfer and the achievement of fertilization. Therefore, these morphological elements deserve particular attention as they hold higher taxonomic value compared to morphological traits of the bulb for which a relevant role in mating and fertilization has not been proven. Thus, an approach to species delimitation based on biosemiotics, with its specific evaluation of morphological structures, provides new insights for the multidisciplinary endeavour of modern integrative taxonomy.

In our paper, we analyse the relationship of the evolutionary philosophy of Charles Sanders Peirce to Lamarckian natural philosophy and link it to concepts of teleology, focusing especially on Aristotelian and Peircean conceptions of the final cause. Peirce commented on evolution in many of his writings, especially in 1891-1893 in essays such as 'Evolutionary Love' (1893) or 'Man's Glassy Essence' (1892). After introducing the three types of evolution distinguished by Peirce, we compare Peirce's and Lamarck's views on evolution, habit, and teleology. From a synthesis of concepts formulated by Peirce, Aristotle, nineteenth-century neo-Lamarckians, and current knowledge regarding epigenetics, there should emerge our own concept of biological teleology unburdened by panpsychism, subjective intentions, or determinism. We believe it could be a concept acceptable to current biology.

Two ideas are popular among biologists. The first idea is concerned with the biased nature of biology, especially the idea that biologists have overemphasized the importance of competition in the past. The second idea is concerned with progress in correcting for biases, namely, that the biased nature of biology decreases with time. To test these ideas, data on the popularity of interaction topics, such as competition, predation, and mutualism, was collected from articles published in biology journals. Research biases should be visible in publication data as systematic over- and underemphases regarding the popularity of alternative, viable research topics. Were the two ideas correct, data should show that the popularity of a historically dominant topic(s) diminishes with time, whereas the popularity of historically marginal, alternative topics increases with time. The data show that the two ideas are false. According to publication data, the biased nature of biology increases with time, which is a sign of regress rather than progress in biology.