Polyphenism "fatal" to Darwin's theory and his namesake neo-darwinism.

Polyphenism is the phenomenon where two or more distinct phenotypes (forms) are produced by the same genotype (genes). There are several types of polyphenism in animals, from having sex determined by the environment to the castes of honey bees and other social insects.

Evolution today is also known as the modern synthesis AKA NeoDarwinism. It combines Darwin's "natural selection" with the study of population genetics. It states that "random" mutations occur in the DNA changing the genome that causes the creation of a new phenotype (form) to occur. This is acted upon by "natural selection" to fix the mutations in the genotype (all the genes).

 Polyphenism occurs without a change in the genotype. But how then can there be more than one phenotypes arising from the one genotype?

From Darwin through the modern synthesis up till approximately 15 years ago this remained a mystery.

Epigenetics however is changing all this.

By regulating a "similar" gene set (genotype), epigenetics can make different phenotypes rapidly a process often called "phenotypic plasticity". The same genes but different forms. Polyphenism is an example.

I will explore the progress of journals as we move through the modern synthesis towards epigenetics. We shall see that epigenetics provides a better answer.

Before I do this I would like to quote the famed "militant" evolutionist, Jerry Coyle. He gives this explanation for polyphenism by using the explanatory powers of the modern synthesis AKA evolution as quoted by a writer.

"Coyne’s point to the fact that the same genes can create radically different phenotypes in a single organism – is triggered by a regulatory gene. (Coyne doesn’t say whether such a gene has yet been identified for grasshoppers or caterpillar/butterflies, but I’m happy to believe that this is indeed the probable origin of the morphological switch, regardless of whether we know the details."

A classic "argumentum ad ignorantiam" (argument from ignorance) where X is possible, therefore, X is probably true. Ie the modern synthesis doesn't explain it but it will someday.

Coyne holds to the gene-centric point of view that is a part of the modern synthesis. It hopes against hope that one day a gene that regulates the other genes will be found.

They did not know that there is an ensemble of epigenetic "tags" sitting on top of the genes. They are left with the modern synthesis for 60 years to explain things.

There have been many warnings that other things were going on than just the gene-centric point of view. A quasi-religious commitment to the modern synthesis made it easy to ignore these discoveries.

To be sure it was easy to find mutations in genes however they generously attributed these changes to changes in the phenotype. More and more we know that this is not the main cause of gene expression, epigenetics is. And mutations are not required.

To the journal articles:

1984"

Evolutionists have long recognized that the presence of sterile workers is difficult to explain by traditional individual selection.

Darwin proposed that workers evolve through selection at the level of the colony, a mechanism that is probably important in several respects.

Darwin said of the workers in eusocial insects that they posed" one special difficulty, which at first appeared to me insuperable, and fatal to my whole theory...[because] being sterile, they cannot propagate their kind"

This is one of the ten times that Darwin uses the phrase "fatal to my theory" which is to his credit. At least he made conditions and exclusions to his theory.  Unfortunately, however, scientists just ignore the exclusions. For natural selection and survival of the fittest to occur it is essential that the fittest replicate. A neuter insect would go against this as this author recognizes. It can't pass on it's "fit" genes.

1999

"Many insects show polyphenisms, or alternative morphologies, which are based on differential gene expression rather than genetic polymorphism.

Little is known about the proximate molecular mechanisms underlying this process, or any other such polyphenism

Numerous genes appear to be differentially expressed between the two castes."

This author is closer to finding out the truth. He realizes that there must be a different rate of expression of the genes for the different phenotypes to occur. Epigenetics is exactly what causes that differential rate of expression. Within five years the author's predictions will be realized.

2002

"Epigenesis concerns the interactions through which the inherited potentials of the genome become actualized into an adult organism.

These areas of interspecies cooperation in morphogenesis have profound implications for what we consider to be normal development and how we proceed to study it.

The decline and resurgence of these ideas.

Studies of predator-induced polyphenism have shown that soluble factors from predators can change the development of prey in specific ways."

This is one of the earlier articles on epigenetics as such the author was talking in general terms. However, he still predicted that this could account for insect variability. He refers to the decline and resurgence of these ideas. In essence, he talking about Lamarckism which was highly maligned for over a hundred years but is again being considered.

2006

"Little is known about the mechanism by which polyphenisms originate.

Selection for increased color change in response to heat stress resulted in the evolution of a larval color polytheism.

Mechanisms that regulate developmental hormones can mask genetic variation and act as evolutionary capacitors, facilitating the origin of novel adaptive phenotypes."

This author did not get the memo about epigenetics. He's using terms like "selection", evolutionary capacitors, whatever that is, and adaptive phenotypes. 

As an aside, I've already discussed phenotypic plasticity. Evolutionists hope that this can be "selected" for and cause adaptive plasticity. 

Adaptive plasticity is the idea that the phenotypically plastic organism can get fixed by means of mutation and natural selection. This would be consistent with modern synthesis.

 However,  one review of 213 journal articles concluded that phenotypic plasticity does not go to adaptive plasticity at least that we can confirm experimentally. 

For this to happen the epigenetic tags would have to allow a mutation of the DNA for natural selection to occur to create a new genotype and phenotype. As we discussed epigenetics does not change the DNA sequence nevertheless this is a hot topic for research. Gotta keep those words like adaptation for Darwin.

As an aside epigenetics has been linked to higher mutation rates however these are not "random" mutations as required by the modern synthesis. Epimutations are directed at specific DNA sequences called the CpG islands. This is part of the technically non-coding DNA (or non exonic/intronic DNA). Recall the modern synthesis works on the exonic DNA, not the noncoding DNA.

If adaptive plasticity is proven it's still going to be due to specific epigenetic guided mutations, not random ones per the modern synthesis.

2011

"Polyphenism is the phenomenon where two or more distinct phenotypes are produced by the same genotype. Examples of polyphenism provide some of the most compelling systems for the study of epigenetics

Polyphenisms are a major reason for the success of the insects, allowing them to partition life-history stages."

At this point, we are more and more certain that epigenetics is what causes these Polyphenisms though there's only one genotype. It's all coming together now.

2021

"animal populations can produce substantial phenotypic variation despite genetic identity.

This epigenetically caused phenotypic variation comes from different sources, namely directional environmental induction and bed-hedging developmental stochastic.

evidence suggests that inherited epimutations with phenotypic effects may end up in phenotype-fixing genetic mutations by accelerated mutation of methylated nucleotides."

This author recognizes that epigenetics is the cause of polyphenisms in insects. It brings up the possibility of epimutations instead of using the word selection which is laden with Darwinist thinking. They use the term "phenotype fixing" by accelerated mutations in the epigenetic apparatus. But again these are not "random" mutations rather directed mutations that are outside of the modern synthesis.

In conclusion, polyphenism is not only fatal to Darwin's theory but also to the follow-up theory which borrows his name, mainly neo-Darwinism.

Meanwhile, a 200-year-old theory called Lamarckism has been brought back to the fore font.

And to think he was discredited by a stupid mutilation experiment on rats