Multicellularity challenges NeoDarwinism


"This convergent evolution is well summarized by the saying 'There are many roads to Rome, but Rome is not what it used to be'."

Multicellularity is the evolution of organisms from unicellular to multicellular forms. It is one of the most significant events in the history of life on Earth, and it has had a major impact on the evolution of all multicellular organisms, including humans.

Neo-Darwinism is the modern synthesis of Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection and Mendelian genetics. It is a waning theory of evolution, and it provides a framework for understanding how living organisms evolve over time.

However, multicellularity presents challenges to neo-Darwinism. Here are 10 ways in which multicellularity challenges neo-Darwinism:

  1. Multicellularity creates new levels of individuality. In unicellular organisms, the individual is the cell itself. However, in multicellular organisms, the individual is the organism as a whole, which is made up of many different types of cells. This creates a new level of individuality, and it raises the question of how natural selection can operate at this level.

  2. Multicellularity allows for the evolution of altruism. In unicellular organisms, natural selection favors individuals that are more likely to survive and reproduce. However, in multicellular organisms, individuals are more likely to help other members of the group to survive and reproduce. This is known as altruism, and it is a major challenge for neo-Darwinism to explain.

  3. Multicellularity allows for the evolution of cooperation. Multicellular organisms are able to achieve complex tasks through the cooperation of different types of cells. However, cooperation is a challenge for neo-Darwinism to explain, because it conflicts with the idea that natural selection favors individuals that are more likely to survive and reproduce.

  4. Multicellularity allows for the evolution of complex developmental programs. Multicellular organisms develop from a single cell into a complex organism with many different types of cells and tissues. This requires a complex developmental program, which is encoded in the genome. However, the evolution of such complex developmental programs is a challenge for neo-Darwinism to explain.

  5. Multicellularity allows for the evolution of new mechanisms of inheritance. In multicellular organisms, inheritance is not simply a matter of passing genes from one generation to the next. There are also NonDarwinian epigenetic mechanisms of inheritance, which can pass on information about the environment and the organism's experiences to the next generation. Epigenetic inheritance is a challenge for neo-Darwinism to explain, because it is not based on the transmission of mutated DNA sequences.

  6. Multicellularity allows for the evolution of new mechanisms of variation. In multicellular organisms, variation can arise not only through mutations in DNA, but also through recombination of DNA during meiosis and through epigenetic mechanisms. The evolution of new mechanisms of variation is a challenge for neo-Darwinism to explain, because it is not clear how these mechanisms can be favored by natural selection.

  7. Multicellularity allows for the evolution of new mechanisms of NonDarwinian selection. In multicellular organisms, NonDarwinian adaptation  can operate at different levels, including the level of the individual, the level of the group, and the level of the cell. This creates new challenges for neo-Darwinism to explain, because it is not clear how natural selection can operate at these different levels and how the different levels of adaptation  interact with each other.

  8. Multicellularity allows for the evolution of new types of fitness. In unicellular organisms, fitness is typically measured by reproductive success. However, in multicellular organisms, fitness can also be measured by the ability to contribute to the success of the group. This creates a new challenge for neo-Darwinism to explain, because it is not clear how natural selection can favor individuals that are more likely to contribute to the success of the group, even if they are less likely to reproduce themselves.

  9. Multicellularity allows for the evolution of new types of adaptation. Multicellular organisms can adapt to their environment in ways that are not possible for unicellular organisms. For example, multicellular organisms can evolve complex traits such as social behavior and communication. The evolution of new types of adaptation is a challenge for neo-Darwinism to explain, because it is not clear how natural selection can favor such complex traits.

  10. Multicellularity allows for the evolution of new types of macroevolution. Macroevolution is the evolution of large-scale patterns, such as the evolution of new species and lineages. Multicellularity has led to new patterns of macroevolution, such as the rapid diversification of animals and the evolution of new types of ecosystems. The evolution of new types of macroevolution is a challenge for neo-Darwinism to explain, because it is not clear how natural selection can lead to such large-scale changes.

These are just some of the ways in which multicellularity challenges neo-Darwinism.

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