"Does evolutionary theory need a rethink?"


In 2014, a group of scientists published an article in Nature titled "Does evolutionary theory need a rethink?" The article argued that the modern synthesis, the prevailing theory of evolution, is incomplete and needs to be updated to incorporate new findings from fields such as developmental biology, epigenetics, and ecology.

The authors of the article, led by Kevin Laland of the University of St Andrews, Scotland, argued that the modern synthesis focuses too heavily on natural selection and neglects other important factors that influence evolution, such as the role of the environment, the effects of learning and culture, and the transmission of information between generations. They called for a new framework for understanding evolution, which they called the extended evolutionary synthesis (EES).

The EES has been met with mixed reactions from the scientific community. Some scientists have welcomed the call for a rethink, arguing that the modern synthesis is outdated and needs to be updated to reflect our current understanding of evolution. Others have been more critical, arguing that the EES is not a coherent theory and that it does not offer any new insights into evolution.

The debate over the EES is likely to continue for some time. However, the article in Nature has helped to raise awareness of the need to update our understanding of evolution and to incorporate new findings from other fields of science.

Here are some of the key points made in the article:

  • The modern synthesis is incomplete and needs to be updated to incorporate new findings from fields such as developmental biology, epigenetics, and ecology.

  • The EES emphasizes the role of the environment, learning, and culture in evolution.

  • The EES provides a more holistic view of evolution than the modern synthesis.

  • The EES is still under development, but it has the potential to revolutionize our understanding of evolution.

The article in Nature has sparked a debate about the future of evolutionary theory. It remains to be seen whether the EES will be widely accepted by the scientific community, but it has certainly raised important questions about how we think about evolution.

Since this article Pubmed shows 1,000 citations to the EES, five times that of the modern synthesis. Plus a large portion of those articles say the modern synthesis needs revision.

The extended evolutionary synthesis (EES) is gaining followers in the field of evolutionary biology. This is because the EES offers a more comprehensive and integrated view of evolution than the modern synthesis, which was the dominant paradigm in evolutionary biology for much of the 20th century.

The EES emphasizes the role of developmental processes, extra-genetic forms of inheritance, and niche construction in evolution. These factors were largely ignored by the modern synthesis, which focused primarily on the role of natural selection in shaping evolution.

The EES has been gaining ground in recent years as more and more research has accumulated to support its claims. For example, studies have shown that developmental processes can play a significant role in generating new variation, which can then be acted upon by natural selection. Additionally, research on extra-genetic forms of inheritance has shown that these can also play a role in evolution.

The EES is still a relatively new paradigm, and there is still much research to be done to fully understand its implications. However, it is clear that the EES is a valuable addition to evolutionary theory, and it is likely to continue to gain followers in the years to come.

Here are some of the reasons why the extended evolutionary synthesis is gaining followers:

  • It provides a more comprehensive and integrated view of evolution.

  • It is supported by a growing body of research.

  • It offers new insights into the evolution of complex traits.

  • It has the potential to lead to new applications in biotechnology.

The extended evolutionary synthesis is still a work in progress, but it is a promising new paradigm that has the potential to revolutionize our understanding of evolution.

Here are 10 ways epigenetics challenges neo darwinism:

  1. Epigenetic changes can be inherited. This means that the effects of environmental factors can be passed down to future generations, even if the DNA sequence itself has not changed. This challenges the idea that evolution is only driven by changes in the DNA sequence.

  2. Epigenetic changes can be rapid. They can occur in a single generation, which is much faster than the gradual accumulation of genetic mutations that is predicted by neodarwinism.

  3. Epigenetic changes can be reversible. This means that they can be erased by environmental factors, which challenges the idea that they are permanent.

  4. Epigenetic changes can be widespread. They can affect many genes at once, which challenges the idea that evolution is driven by the selection of individual genes.

  5. Epigenetic changes can be context-dependent. The effects of epigenetic changes can depend on the environment, which challenges the idea that evolution is a deterministic process.

  6. Epigenetic changes can be influenced by behavior. The choices we make can influence our epigenetic profile, which challenges the idea that evolution is only driven by natural selection.

  7. Epigenetic changes can be affected by diet. The food we eat can influence our epigenetic profile, which challenges the idea that evolution is only driven by genetic inheritance.

  8. Epigenetic changes can be affected by stress. The amount of stress we experience can influence our epigenetic profile, which challenges the idea that evolution is only driven by environmental factors.

  9. Epigenetic changes can be affected by pollution. Exposure to pollutants can influence our epigenetic profile, which challenges the idea that evolution is only driven by natural factors.

  10. Epigenetic changes can be affected by social factors. Our social environment can influence our epigenetic profile, which challenges the idea that evolution is only driven by individual factors.

These are just some of the ways that epigenetics challenges neodarwinism.

Epigenetic changes can provide a mechanism for rapid adaptation while neo darwinism can not. Epigenetics explains how these changes are preserved and passed down to future generations.

The study of epigenetics is a rapidly growing field, and it is likely that we will learn much more about how it affects evolution in the years to come. This new knowledge could help us to better understand the evolution of our own species, and it could also help us to develop new treatments for diseases that are influenced by epigenetic factors.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond the Sequence: The Epigenetic "Fingers" That Play the DNA Keyboard

Image
Imagine the keyboard itself is not a standard piano keyboard, but a modular synthesizer, capable of producing an almost infinite array of sounds. The DNA sequence, then, represents the fundamental building blocks of this synthesizer, the raw materials from which all sounds are generated. Epigenetics, our "fingers," manipulates these building blocks, adjusting parameters like volume, timbre, and rhythm, transforming the raw potential of the DNA sequence into a symphony of cellular functions. We can further refine the "fingers" analogy. Consider that each finger represents a distinct epigenetic mechanism: DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNA.  DNA methylation, for instance, might be the "index finger," capable of precisely silencing specific genes, like muting individual keys on the synthesizer. Histone modifications, the "middle finger," could represent the ability to adjust the accessibility of the DN...
Read more

Why are Christian philosophers running towards Darwin while biologists are "running" away?

Image
As nature reveals the strength of epigenetics and the weakness of Neo-Darwinism, biologists are “running” away from the long-standing accepted theory. In The Federalist , April 2019, Benjamin Dierker reviews “Why one-third of biologists now question Darwinism”: "Current estimates are that approximately one-third of professional academic biologists who do not believe in intelligent design find Darwin’s Theory inadequate to describe all of the complexity in biology.” Dierker continues, “The important note is that these are not ideologues or religious zealots, nor do they propose a god or biblical solution.  Rather, they find problems in the lack of explanatory power of Darwin’s theory in light of modern understanding of mutation, variation, DNA sequencing and more. These expressions of doubt do not reject naturalism or evolution per se, but the rigor of the Neo-Darwinian model for explaining the development of life.” For 40 years, scientists calculated natural se...
Read more

Rewriting the Rules: Epigenomic Mutation Bias Challenges Randomness in Evolution

Image
This research challenges the long-held dogma that mutations occur randomly, irrespective of their consequences, by demonstrating a clear, epigenome-mediated mutation bias in Arabidopsis thaliana . The study meticulously unveils how mutation rates are not uniform across the genome but are significantly reduced in functionally constrained regions, particularly within gene bodies and essential genes. This discovery fundamentally alters our understanding of evolutionary processes, suggesting that mutation is not a purely directionless force. "Mutation bias reflects natural selection in Arabidopsis thaliana" This opening statement encapsulates the core finding: mutation rates are not random but reflect epigenetic pressures. The authors demonstrate that mutations are less frequent in crucial genomic regions, directly contradicting the prevailing theory of random mutation. This observation suggests an active mechanism that minimizes deleterious mutations in essentia...
Read more