The Creativity of Natural Selection? Part I: Darwin,Darwinism, and the Mutationists

This is the first of a two-part essay on the history of debates concerning the creativity of natural selection, from Darwin through the evolutionary synthesis and up to the present. Here I focus on the mid-late nineteenth century to the early twentieth, with special emphasis on early Darwinism and its critics, the self-styled “mutationists.” The second part focuses on the evolutionary synthesis and some of its critics, especially the “neutralists” and “neo-mutationists.” Like Stephen Gould, I consider the creativity of natural selection to be a key component of what has traditionally counted as “Darwinism.” I argue that the creativity of natural selection is best understood in terms of (1) selection initiating evolutionary change, and (2) selection being responsible for the presence of the variation it acts upon, for example by directing the course of variation. I consider the respects in which both of these claims sound non-Darwinian, even though they have long been understood by supporters and critics alike to be virtually constitutive of Darwinism.     

Anecdotal,Historical and Critical Commentaries on Genetics: Darwin and Darwinism: The (Alleged) Social Implications of The Origin of Species

Most scientific theories, even revolutionary ones, change the practice of a particular science but have few consequences for culture or society at large. But Darwinism, it has often been said, is different in this respect. Since the publication of The Origin of Species, many have claimed that Darwinism has a number of profound social implications. Here, I briefly consider three of these: the economic, the political, and the religious. I suggest that, for the most part, these supposed implications have been misconstrued or exaggerated. Indeed, it is reasonably clear that the chain of implication sometimes primarily ran in the opposite direction—from, for instance, economics and political theory to Darwinism.THE appearance of The Origin of Species launched one of the greatest, and most justly celebrated, revolutions in the history of science. But in the 150 years since the appearance of Darwin''s book, many scholars, scientists, and pundits have claimed that Darwinism did more than revolutionize biology. Darwinism, they claim, also had a number of social and cultural consequences: economic and political, medical, eugenic, educational, and religious. Some of these consequences are to be applauded and others regretted, but all, it is said, can be traced to important strands of thought in The Origin of Species. One of the ironies of modern history would thus seem to be that the close scientific study of pigeons, mockingbirds, and barnacles could have such consequences.But while the case for the scientific importance of Darwinism is incontestable, the case for its presumed social and cultural consequences is far more complex and, in places, dubious. Here I consider three of these supposed consequences: the economic, the political, and the religious. Because the economic and religious cases have been widely discussed, I focus on the political one. I should note that I am not an expert on economics, political theory, or religion, but a biologist. Perhaps fortunately, then, little that I have to say is new but reflects the efforts of many social scientists and historians. Because their ideas seem little known among biologists, they may be worth recounting here.     

Mort ou persistance du darwinisme ? Regard d’un épistémologue

The article examines why evolutionary biologists have been haunted by the question whether they are “Darwinian” or “non-Darwinian” ever since Darwin's Origin of species. Modern criticisms addressed to Darwinism are classified into two categories: those concerning Darwin's hypothesis of “descent with modification” and those addressed to the hypothesis of natural selection. In both cases, although the particular models that Darwin proposed for these two hypotheses have been significantly revised and expanded, Darwin's general framework has constrained and canalized evolutionary research, in the sense that it has settled an array of possible theoretical choices. Gould's changing attitudes regarding Darwinism is taken as a striking illustration of this interpretation.     

Haeckel,un darwinien allemand ?

German biologist Ernst Haeckel (1834–1919) is often considered the most renowned Darwinian in his country since, as early as 1862, he declared that he accepted the conclusions Darwin had reached three years before in On the Origin of Species, and afterwards, he continuously proclaimed himself a supporter of the English naturalist and championed the evolutionary theory. Nevertheless, if we examine carefully his books, in particular his General Morphology (1866), we can see that he carries on a tradition very far from Darwin's thoughts. In spite of his acceptance of the idea of natural selection, that he establishes as an argument for materialism, he adopts, indeed, a conception of evolution that is, in some respects, rather close to Lamarck's views. He is, thus, a good example of the ambiguities of the reception of Darwinism in Germany in the second part of the 19th century. To cite this article: S. Schmitt, C. R. Biologies 332 (2009).     

Epistemology, necessity, and evolution: a critical review of Michael Ruse��s Philosophy After Darwin

Michael Ruse??s new anthology Philosophy After Darwin provides great history and background in the major impacts Darwinism has had on philosophy, especially in ethics and epistemology. This review focuses on epistemology understood through the lens of evolution by natural selection. I focus on one of Ruse??s own articles in the collection, which responds to two classic articles by Konrad Lorenz and David Hull on the two major forms of evolutionary epistemology. I side with Ruse against Lorenz??s account of the necessity we think our principles of reasoning have, though I disagree with Ruse??s particular example. I also argue that Ruse??s alternative explanation is lacking. Against Hull, I side with Ruse in his doubts that a sociobiological approach to science will prove fruitful, though I point out that it has certain advantages other approaches do not have. Although I side with Ruse on the issue, I conclude that the two views do not really come into direct conflict and so one needs not reject either. Finally, I discuss Ruse??s positive view and raise questions for his conception of evolutionary epistemology. I conclude that his arguments are insufficient to overcome opposing views and his view has at least as many unintuitive conclusions as the alternatives.     

Evolutionary psychology’s moral implications

In this paper, I critically summarize John Cartwrtight’s Evolution and Human Behavior and evaluate what he says about certain moral implications of Darwinian views of human behavior. He takes a Darwinism-doesn’t-rock-the-boat approach and argues that Darwinism, even if it is allied with evolutionary psychology, does not give us reason to be worried about the alterability of our behavior, nor does it give us reason to think that we may have to change our ordinary practices and views concerning free-will and moral responsibility. In response, I contend that Darwinism, when it is allied with evolutionary psychology, makes for a more potent cocktail than Cartwright suspects.     

Utopianism in the British evolutionary synthesis

In this paper I propose a new interpretation of the British evolutionary synthesis. The synthetic work of J. B. S. Haldane, R. A. Fisher and J. S. Huxley was characterized by both an integration of Mendelism and Darwinism and the unification of different biological subdisciplines within a coherent framework. But it must also be seen as a bold and synthetic Darwinian program in which the biosciences served as a utopian blueprint for the progress of civilization. Describing the futuristic visions of these three scientists in their synthetic heydays, I show that, despite a number of important divergences, their biopolitical ideals could be biased toward a controlled and regimented utopian society. Their common ideals entailed a social order where liberal and democratic principles were partially or totally suspended in favor of bioscientific control and planning for the future. Finally, I will argue that the original redefinition of Darwinism that modern synthesizers proposed is a significant historical example of how Darwinism has been used and adapted in different contexts. The lesson I draw from this account is a venerable one: that, whenever we wish to define Darwinism, we need to recognize not only its scientific content and achievements but expose the other traditions and ideologies it may have supported.     

Natural Selection and Recombination Rate Variation Shape Nucleotide Polymorphism Across the Genomes of Three Related Populus Species

A central aim of evolutionary genomics is to identify the relative roles that various evolutionary forces have played in generating and shaping genetic variation within and among species. Here we use whole-genome resequencing data to characterize and compare genome-wide patterns of nucleotide polymorphism, site frequency spectrum, and population-scaled recombination rates in three species of Populus: Populus tremula, P. tremuloides, and P. trichocarpa. We find that P. tremuloides has the highest level of genome-wide variation, skewed allele frequencies, and population-scaled recombination rates, whereas P. trichocarpa harbors the lowest. Our findings highlight multiple lines of evidence suggesting that natural selection, due to both purifying and positive selection, has widely shaped patterns of nucleotide polymorphism at linked neutral sites in all three species. Differences in effective population sizes and rates of recombination largely explain the disparate magnitudes and signatures of linked selection that we observe among species. The present work provides the first phylogenetic comparative study on a genome-wide scale in forest trees. This information will also improve our ability to understand how various evolutionary forces have interacted to influence genome evolution among related species.     

Sympatric speciation of the plague microbe <Emphasis Type="Italic">Yersinia pestis</Emphasis>: Monohostal specialization in the host–parasite marmot–flea (<Emphasis Type="Italic">Marmota sibirica–Oropsylla silantiewi</Emphasis>) system

An ecological scenario of the origin of the plague microbe that is interpreted in the light of modern Darwinism (synthetic theory of evolution) is presented. It is shown that the plague microbe emerged from a clone of the psychrophilic saprozoonotic pseudotuberculosis microbe Yersinia pseudotuberculosis O:1b in the mountain steppe landscapes of Central Asia in the Sartan time, 22000–15000 years ago, in the monohostal Mongolian marmot (Marmota sibirica)–flea (Oropsylla silantiewi) host–parasite system. It was noted that the evolutionary process described corresponds to the sympatric form of speciation by transition of the clone of migrant founders to a new, already-existing ecological niche. It was established that monohostal specialization of the plague microbe was made possible due to heterothermia (5–37°C) of marmots in the hibernation period. The factors of the speciation process—isolation, the struggle for existence, and natural selection—were analyzed.     

On Novelty,Heterochrony and Developmental Constraints in a Complex Morphological Theory of Recapitulation: The Genus <Emphasis Type="Italic">Trophon</Emphasis> as a Case Study

Darwin proposed natural selection as the main evolutionary mechanism in 1859. However, he did not think that this was the only process by which new species were generated. It was the so-called Modern Synthesis who established natural selection as the only mechanism responsible for evolution. Since then, the evolutionary process is explained by the pair mutation-adaptation: new species are generated by the appearance of new mutations, which in case of allowing new adaptations to the environment, they will be fixed and organisms will survive, therefore resulting in new species. An alternative view to the plasticity promoted by the adaptationist program is to think organisms as truly organized structures, having different levels of structural organization, which would mean that not every form is possible, but only those that correspond to a certain building plan. This would be reflected in the appearance of structural constraints, showing the limits imposed to the organism during its evolutionary development. In this work, I studied the ontogeny and development of three species of the genus Trophon by geometric morphometrics, in order to clarify important concepts in evolutionary developmental biology (Evo-Devo). Integrating theoretical and empirical investigations, I could propose a new conceptual framework for heterochrony in a context of a complex theory of recapitulation. Furthermore, I could detect a developmental constraint in Trophon, which provided an opportunity to reconstruct the concept of constraint and propose a synthesis between heterochrony and constraint that explained evolution as a process fueled by them, that is, as directive and driving force.     

Darwin teleologist? Design in the Orchids

Focusing on the Orchids, this article aims at disentangling the concepts of teleology, design and natural theology. It refers to several contemporary critics of Darwin (Kölliker, Argyll, Royer, Candolle, Delpino) to challenge Huxley's interpretation that Darwin's system was “a deathblow” to teleology. The Orchids seem rather to be a “flank-movement” (Gray): it departs from the Romantic theories of transmutation and the “imaginary examples” of the Origin; it focuses on empirical data and on teleological structures. Although Darwin refers to natural selection, his readers mock him for his fascination for delicate morphological contrivances and co-adaptations – a sign that he was inescapably lured to finality. Some even suggested that his system was a “theodicy”. In the history of Darwinism, the Orchids reveal “another” quite unexpected and heterodox Darwin: freed from the hypothetical fancies of the Origin, and even suggesting a new kind of physico-theology.     

Palaeontology and Evolutionary Developmental Biology: A Science of the Nineteenth and Twenty–first Centuries

A wind of change has swept through palaeontology in the past few decades. Contrast Sir Peter Medawar’s dismissive: ‘palaeontology is a particularly undemanding branch of science’ (as recalled by John Maynard Smith in Sabbagh 1999, p. 158) with ‘Palaeontology: grasping the opportunities in the science of the twenty–first century’, the title of a contribution to a special issue of Geobios by the Cambridge palaeontologist, Simon Conway Morris (1998a). The winds of change have come partly from palaeontologists seeking to broaden the impact of their studies and partly from biologists (neontologists) realizing the contributions that palaeontology can make to their disciplines. Consequently, impressions of past life preserved in stone are coming alive. Fossils are being described and analyzed using new tools and languages as the static fossil record becomes a record of transitions in patterns that can be explained and related to biological, ecological, climatic and tectonic changes. The latest addition is evolutionary developmental biology, or ‘evo–devo’, whose language provides a new basis upon which to interpret anatomical change, both materially and mechanistically. In this review I examine the major contributions made by palaeontology, how palaeontology has been linked to evolution and to embryology in the past, and how links with evo–devo have enlivened and will continue to enliven both palaeontology and evo–devo. Closer links between the two fields should illuminate important unresolved issues related to the origin of the metazoans (e.g. Why is there a conflict between molecular clocks and the fossil record in timing the metazoan radiation; were Precambrian metazoan ancestors similar to extant larvae or to miniature adults?) and to diversification of the metazoans (e.g. How do developmental constraints bias the direction of evolution; how do microevolutionary developmental processes relate to macroevolutionary changes?).     

The Extended Synthesis: Something Old, Something New

The eclipse of Darwinism began to end in the 1980s and hangs in the balance today. We need an Extended Synthesis, using “extension” metaphorically. We must extend back in time to recover important aspects of Darwinism that were set aside, and then lost during neo-Darwinism, then move forward beyond neo-Darwinism to encompass new data and concepts. The most comprehensive framework for the Extended Synthesis is the Major Transitions in Evolution. The Extended Synthesis rests comfortably within a philosophical perspective in which biology does not need to be connected with other areas of science in order to justify itself. I am attracted to an older concept in which biology needs a covering law to connect it with the rest of the natural sciences. Darwin implicated a “higher law,” but did not specify it. If we can elucidate that law, the Extended Synthesis will become the Unified Theory of Biology called for by Brooks and Wiley 25 years ago.     

Genome-wide population genetic analysis identifies evolutionary forces establishing continuous population divergence

Elucidating the mechanism shaping the spatial variations of traits has long been a central concern of evolutionary biologists. Geographic clines of allele/morph frequencies along environmental gradients are suggested to be established and maintained by the balancing of two opposing evolutionary forces, namely selection that generates spatial differentiation in morph frequencies, and selection and/or stochastic factors that lead to the coexistence of multiple morphs within a population. Thus, testing for both selection and stochastic factors is necessary for a comprehensive understanding of the mechanism underlying clinal variation in morph/allele frequency in natural populations. Here, I identified the evolutionary forces responsible for clinal variation of color morph frequency in Ischnura senegalensis by comparing the population divergence of putatively neutral loci generated by high-throughput next-generation sequencing (F _STn) with that of the putative color locus (F _STc). No strong correlation was observed between F _STn and F _STc, suggesting that stochastic factors contribute less to color-locus population divergence. F _STc was less than F _STn between populations exposed to similar environmental conditions, but greater than F _STn between populations exposed to different environmental conditions, suggesting that both balancing selection and divergent selection act on the color locus. Therefore, two antagonistic selection factors rather than stochastic and historical factors contribute to establishing the clinal variation of morph frequency in I. senegalensis.     

Ergoline alkaloids in convolvulaceous host plants originate from epibiotic clavicipitaceous fungi of the genus Periglandula

Ergoline (i.e., ergot) alkaloids are a group of physiologically active natural products occurring in the taxonomically unrelated fungal and plant taxa, Clavicipitaceae and Convolvulaceae, respectively. The disjointed occurrence of ergoline alkaloids seems to contradict the frequent observation that identical or at least structurally related natural products occur in organisms with a common evolutionary history. This problem has now been solved by the finding that not only graminaceous but also some dicotyledonous plants belonging to the family Convolvulaceae, such as Ipomoea asarifolia and Turbina corymbosa, form close associations with ergoline alkaloid producing fungi, Periglandula ipomoeae and Periglandula turbinae. These species belong to the newly established genus Periglandula within the Clavicipitaceae. The fungus–plant associations are likely to be mutualistic symbioses.     

Die evolution der pantherkatzen modell zur überprüfung der brauchbarkeit der hennigschen prinzipien der phylogenetischen systematik für wirbeltierpaläontologische studien

The species and genus group of pantherine cats (Panthera, Uncia, Neofelis) has been studied in the fields of zoology, palaeontology and biogeography as far as allowing a total mosaic pattern of its evolution, which, though it is incomplete, is free of contradictions. Thus it is suited as a model for checking the applicability of Hennig’s phyletical concepts to pure palaeontological studies in vertebrates. By this it results that the principles of the phylogenetic systematics are unquestionably useful due to their terminological clearness, but are not sufficient alone for the reconstruction of evolutionary processes. Dichotomy or radiation in evolutionary splitting of a species should not be a question of principle.     

Natural selection through survival alone,and the possibility of Gaia

Here I advance two related evolutionary propositions. (1) Natural selection is most often considered to require competition between reproducing “individuals”, sometimes quite broadly conceived, as in cases of clonal, species or multispecies-community selection. But differential survival of non-competing and non-reproducing individuals will also result in increasing frequencies of survival-promoting “adaptations” among survivors, and thus is also a kind of natural selection. (2) Darwinists have challenged the view that the Earth’s biosphere is an evolved global homeostatic system. Since there is only one biosphere, reproductive competition cannot have been involved in selection for such survival-promoting adaptations, they claim. But natural selection through survival could reconcile Gaia with evolutionary theory.     

A molecular revision of the taxonomic status of mermithid parasites of black flies from Quebec (Canada)

The four currently recognized mermithid (Nematoda) species parasitizing black flies (Diptera: Simuliidae) from Northeast America were distinguished using discriminatory PCR primers aimed at COI and 18S rDNA. Isomermis wisconsinensis, Gastromermis viridis and Mesomermis camdenensis were easily differentiated using either genomic target, even for juvenile mermithids damaged beyond morphological recognition. However, specimens from Mesomermis flumenalis being identical in external morphology and producing a unique-sized PCR product were classified by sequence data into four clearly distinguished molecular variants. This quartet was made of two winter and two summer ‘physiological variants’, including one which also belonged to, but diverged early from the rest of the Mesomermis genus. Combining the multiplex PCR and sequencing approaches allowed for the characterization of a multiple parasitism which simultaneously implicated I. wisconsinensis and two M. flumenalis variants. With another instance where parasites were identified by morphology only, this is the first report of black fly parasitism by multiple mermithid species. A phylogenetic tree built by combining our sequences to previous GenBank entries likely indicates a monophyletic origin for the mermithid family, but also suggests that differentiation between parasite genera sometimes occurred before the evolutionary emergence of the actual host group.     

Reinforcement of Gametic Isolation in Drosophila

Reinforcement, a process by which natural selection increases reproductive isolation between populations, has been suggested to be an important force in the formation of new species. However, all existing cases of reinforcement involve an increase in mate discrimination between species. Here, I report the first case of reinforcement of postmating prezygotic isolation (i.e., barriers that act after mating but before fertilization) in animals. On the slopes of the African island of São Tomé, Drosophila yakuba and its endemic sister species D. santomea hybridize within a well-demarcated hybrid zone. I find that D. yakuba females from within this zone, but not from outside it, show an increase in gametic isolation from males of D. santomea, an apparent result of natural selection acting to reduce maladaptive hybridization between species. To determine whether such a barrier could evolve under laboratory conditions, I exposed D. yakuba lines derived from allopatric populations to experimental sympatry with D. santomea, and found that both behavioral and gametic isolation become stronger after only four generations. Reinforcement thus appears to be the best explanation for the heightened gametic isolation seen in sympatry. This appears to be the first example in animals in which natural selection has promoted the evolution of stronger interspecific genetic barriers that act after mating but before fertilization. This suggests that many other genetic barriers between species have been increased by natural selection but have been overlooked because they are difficult to study.     

A levels-of-selection approach to evolutionary individuality

What changes when an evolutionary transition in individuality takes place? Many different answers have been given, in respect of different cases of actual transition, but some have suggested a general answer: that a major transition is a change in the extent to which selection acts at one hierarchical level rather than another. The current paper evaluates some different ways to develop this general answer as a way to characterise the property ‘evolutionary individuality’; and offers a justification of the option taken in Clarke (J Philos 110(8):413–435, 2013)—to define evolutionary individuality in terms of an object’s capacity to undergo selection at its own level. In addition, I suggest a method by which the property can be measured and argue that a problem which is often considered to be fatal to that method—the problem of ‘cross-level by-products’—can be avoided.