Ism expressed in Spandrels, and which Lewontin and Gould each pursued in many other works, would probably have been far less aggressive if. Gould and Lewontin 1 suggested that at least the following alternative hypotheses. Stephen Jay Gould and Richard C. Lewontin: The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme. C., “The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: a Critique of the. Lewontin (Richard Charles 'Dick' Lewontin) (n. ADAPTIONISM—3. 0 YEARS AFTER GOULD AND LEWONTIN - Nielsen - 2. Evolution. Authors. Rasmus Nielsen Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 1. Kbh . However, with the influx of new ideas and scientific traditions from genomics into evolutionary biology, the old adaptionist controversies are being recycled in a new context. The insight gained by evolutionary biologists, that functional differences cannot be equated to adaptive changes, has at times not been appreciated by the genomics community. In this comment, I argue that even in the presence of both functional data and evidence for selection from DNA sequence data, it is still difficult to construct strong arguments in favor of adaptation. However, despite the difficulties in establishing scientific arguments in favor of specific historic evolutionary events, there is still much to learn about evolution from genomic data. The Spandrels of San Marco. In 1. 97. 9, Stephen Jay Gould and Richard C. Lewontin (Gould and Lewontin 1. The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme.” In this paper, Gould and Lewontin warned against confusing function with adaptation. Functional observations may not always have adaptive explanations—existence of form does not prove purpose. If one observes the spandrels (spaces that exist between arches) of the San Marco church in Venice—the mosaic designs are, in the words of Gould and Lewontin, “so elaborate, harmonious, and purposeful that we are tempted to view it as the starting point of any analysis, as the cause in some sense of the surrounding architecture.” There is in evolutionary biology a similar “failure to distinguish current utility from reasons for origin,” they argued. Functional observations (e. Gould and Lewontin's arguments were by no means embraced by all biological researchers. Their critique of the “adaptionist programme” was embedded in a more general critique of reductionism that did not appeal to many scientists, especially geneticists. Gould Lewontin Spandrels Pdf CreatorHowever, now 3. 0 years later it is clear that, although Gould and Lewontin's paper did not spell the end to adaptionist storytelling, it radically increased the awareness among evolutionary biologists about the pitfalls of adaptionism. Evolutionary biologists are today, arguably, much more reluctant to invent adaptive stories without direct evidence for natural selection acting on the traits in question. We still regularly encounter very na. Hypotheses regarding past selection acting on a gene can be tested directly using comparative or population genetic methods. Although many of the statistical methods used to detect selection at times have been controversial, the field has matured to a state in which it often is possible to make definitive statements about past selection. A good example is the Lactase gene in humans, where even the most skeptical neutralist must be convinced by the overwhelming evidence in favor of selection based on allele frequencies, haplotype structure, and levels of population differentiation (Cavalli- Sforza 1. Bersaglieri et al. Gould Lewontin Spandrels Pdf EditorAnother example is the evolution of certain viruses such as HIV (Bonhoeffer et al. Nielsen and Yang 1. Ross and Rodrigo 2. Influenza (Bush et al. Yang 2. 00. 0), where the rate ratio of nonsynonymous to synonymous mutations (d. N/d. S) is so extreme in certain regions, that only selection acting in favor of new mutations can provide an adequate explanation. Lewontin und sein Harvard-Kollege Stephen Jay Gould f. In ihrer einflussreichen Schrift The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossion paradigm. Evolution The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme STEPHEN JAY GOULD AND RICHARD C. LEWONTIN REPUBLISHED FROM THE ORIGINAL WITH THE KIND PERMISSION OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY. The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm: A Critique of the Adaptationist Programme Author(s): S. Lewontin Source: Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences. Spandrels or selection? Another area of disagreement concerns Gould and Lewontin's concept of 'spandrels' in evolution. Download PDF; View interactive PDF in ReadCube. The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme is een invloedrijk wetenschappelijk artikel over evolutiebiologie, geschreven door Stephen Jay Gould en Richard Lewontin en. Gould (1997) responded, 'The term spandrel may. Critics argue that Lewontin and Gould's. Selection and Adaptation. We now have the ability to detect past selection. The question that remains is if that ultimately helps us establish evidence in favor of adaptation. In some cases it clearly does. The difference in lactose intolerance among human geographic groups, is caused by a difference in allele frequencies in and around the lactase gene (Harvey et al. The cause for the difference in allele frequencies is primarily natural selection emerging about the same time as dairy farming evolved culturally (Bersaglieri et al. Together, these observations lead to a compelling adaptive story of natural selection favoring alleles causing lactose tolerance. But even in this case we have not directly shown that the cause for the selection is differential survival due to an ability/inability to digest lactose. We must acknowledge that there could have been other factors, unknown to us, causing the selection acting on the region around the Lactase gene. Even if we can argue that selection acted on a specific mutation, and functionally that this mutation has a certain effect on the ability to digest lactose, we cannot, strictly speaking, exclude the possibility that selection acted on some other pleiotropic effect of the mutation. This argument is not erected to dispute the adaptive story regarding the lactase gene, the total evidence in favor of adaptation and selection related to lactose tolerance is overwhelming in this case, but rather to argue that the combination of a functional effect and selection does not demonstrate that selection acted on the specific trait in question. The example of selection on viruses is somewhat different. We can here observe selection in action, as the viruses evolve at a rate that allows for direct observation and manipulation. We can repeat the experimental evolution of phages in the laboratory, and demonstrate that the same mutations go to fixation in repeated experiments conducted under the same conditions (Bull et al. We can change environmental conditions to determine which factors cause the selection and measure fitness of specific haplotypes (Crill et al. Holder and Bull 2. In the HIV, we can observe that the d. N/d. S ratio changes when the selective pressure imposed by the hosts defense/immune system weakens (Bonhoeffer et al. Ross and Rodrigo 2. By observing the same process multiple times, and by laboratory manipulation, we can directly test hypotheses and more rigorously establish claims of adaptation. However, this possibility is usually not available to us in higher organisms. In humans, we must rely on inferences regarding past events by observing scant fossil evidence and the current pattern of genetic and phenotypic variation. We may be able to detect selection, but we may never be able to directly determine which traits selection acted on. Evolutionary inferences often have a historic nature to them. Hypotheses regarding the underlying causes of past selection or changes in gene frequencies usually focus on single unique historical events. This does not imply that evolutionary theory does not produce falsifiable predictions—it clearly does (e. Williams 1. 97. 3). But specific historical evolutionary hypotheses, such as just- so stories of why the giraffe got its long neck, or why humans have less body hair than other apes, might not be falsifiable or simple to investigate within any epistemological framework. This has not changed with the presence of molecular data. Although the presence of selection acting on genes underlying a phenotypic trait of interest does help support adaptive stories, it does not establish that selection acted directly on the specific trait of interest. Microcephalin and ASPMThe fallacy that functional effects combined with evidence for selection provides evidence that selection is acting on the specific traits has lead to a number of dubious claims in human genomics. The most famous and maligned example is the selection acting on Microcephalin (Dorus et al. ASPM (Zhang 2. 00. Evans et al. 2. 00. Mekel- Bobrov et al. ASPM and Microcephalin both code for centrosomal proteins involved in cell cycle regulation. Individuals who are homozygous for certain mutations in either of these genes have a complex disease phenotype with microcephaly—a decreased brain size—as its primary feature. Both of these genes also show some evidence of positive selection. ASPM has a very high d. N/d. S ratio in the human lineage (Zhang 2. N/d. S ratio in the ancestral lineages leading to apes (Evans et al. Based on these observations it was proposed that the two genes were involved in the evolution of increased brain size in humans and human ancestors. The argument was further refined with back- to- back papers in Science (Evans et al. Mekel- Bobrov et al. ASPM) and 3. 70. 0 years (Microcephalin). It was pointed out that the allelic variant supposedly under positive selection in Microcephalin (haplogroup D), has the lowest frequency in sub- Saharan Africa and highest frequency in Europeans. Not surprisingly, the popular press had a field day with this story. However, the particular mutations of interest cannot be shown to correlate with cognitive abilities (Mekel- Bobrov et al. Furthermore, fossil evidence shows that human brain size has not increased over at least the last 3. It seems that there has been substantial selection acting on ASPM and microcephalin, possibly also within the last few tens of thousand of years (consult Currat et al. But there is no evidence that this selection has anything to do with human intelligence. Deleterious mutations in ASPM and microcephalin may lead to reduced brain size, presumably because these genes are cell- cycle regulators and very fast cell division is required for normal development of the fetal brain. Mutations in many different genes might cause microcephaly, but changes in these genes may not have been the underlying molecular cause for the increased brain size occurring during the evolution of man. The Microcephalin and ASPM story is just one of a number of adaptive stories told recently relating to human evolution and motivated by the analyses of DNA sequence data. Although it is clearly within normal scientific praxis to propose hypotheses regarding the underlying causes of specific observations, publishing such hypotheses can be particularly problematic when the adaptive stories being told relate to human behavior and cognitive functions.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
January 2017
Categories |