The Extended Evolutionary Synthesis is replacing Evolution (the Modern Synthesis)



The extended evolutionary synthesis (EES) is a newer way of thinking about evolution that differs from the modern synthesis (MS) in several key ways. Some of the ways in which the EES invalidates the MS include:

  • The EES emphasizes the importance of phenotypic plasticity. The MS typically assumes that evolution proceeds through changes in genotype, which then lead to changes in phenotype. However, the EES argues that phenotypic plasticity, or the ability of an organism to change its phenotype in response to its environment, can also play a significant role in evolution without MSs mutations.

  • The EES recognizes the importance of developmental processes in evolution. The MS typically focuses on genes as the primary unit of selection, but the EES argues that developmental processes are also important. This is because developmental processes can influence how genes are expressed, and thus how phenotypes are produced.

  • The EES acknowledges the role of non-genetic inheritance in evolution. The MS typically assumes that inheritance is only through genes, but the EES recognizes that non-genetic factors, such as epigenetics, can also be inherited. This means that traits that are not encoded in DNA can still be passed down from parents to offspring.

  • The EES emphasizes the importance of contingency in evolution. The MS typically assumes that evolution is a deterministic process, but the EES argues that contingency, or the role of chance events, is also important. The EES recognizes the importance of cooperation in evolution. The MS typically focuses on competition as the primary driver of evolution, but the EES argues that cooperation can also play a significant role. This is because cooperation can help organisms to survive and reproduce, and it can also lead to the evolution of new traits.

  • The EES emphasizes the importance of ecology in evolution. The MS typically focuses on genes and individuals, but the EES argues that ecology is also important. This is because the environment can influence how genes are expressed, how organisms interact with each other.

  • The EES recognizes the importance of timescales in evolution. The MS typically focuses on short-term evolutionary processes, but the EES argues that long-term evolutionary processes are also important. This is because long-term processes, such as speciation, can be influenced by factors that are not important on short timescales.

  • The EES recognizes the importance of experimental evidence in evolutionary biology. The MS was largely developed based on theoretical models, but the EES argues that experimental evidence is also important. This is because experiments can help to test the predictions of evolutionary theory, and they can also help to identify new evolutionary processes.

  • The EES is open to new ideas and approaches. The MS is a well-established theory, but the EES is more open to new ideas and approaches. This is because the EES is still a relatively new theory, and it is still evolving.

The EES provides a more comprehensive and nuanced view of evolution, and it takes into account factors that were not considered by the MS.

The EES is still a relatively new theory, and it is still being debated by evolutionary biologists. However, it is a promising new approach to evolutionary biology, and it has the potential to revolutionize our understanding of how evolution works and replace the modern synthesis.


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

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

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