Evolutionary biology and feminism

Evolutionary biology and feminism share a variety of philosophical and practical concerns. I have tried to describe how a perspective from both evolutionary biology and feminism can accelerate the achievement of goals for both feminists and evolutionary biologists. In an early section of this paper I discuss the importance of variation to the disciplines of evolutionary biology and feminism. In the section entitled “Control of Female Reproduction” I demonstrate how insight provided by participation in life as woman and also as a feminist suggests testable hypotheses about the evolution of social behavior—hypotheses that are applicable to our investigations of the evolution of social behavior in nonhuman animals. In the section on “Deceit, Self-deception, and Patriarchal Reversals” I have overtly conceded that evolutionary biology, a scientific discipline, also represents a human cultural practice that, like other human cultural practices, may in parts and at times be characterized by deceit and self-deception. In the section on “Femininity” I have indicated how questions cast and answered and hypotheses tested from an evolutionary perspective can serve women and men struggling with sexist oppression. Patricia Adair Gowaty studies the evolution of social behavior, particularly mating systems and sex allocation, primarily in birds. She is most well-known for her long-term studies of eastern bluebirds, which began in 1977 and are on-going. She was an undergraduate at H. Sophie Newcomb College of Tulane University (1963–1967). In the late sixties and early seventies, while employed at the Bronx Zoo (New York Zoological Society), she belonged to a feminist “consciousness-raising” group. She started graduate school in 1974 at the University of Georgia and received her Ph.D. from Clemson University (1980). She had a postdoctoral position at the University of Oklahoma (1982–1983) and a visiting faculty position at Cornell University through the Visiting Professorships for Women NSF program (1983–1984) before returning to her bluebird study sites at Clemson in 1985. She has supported herself and her research efforts throughout her academic career on a series of awards and grants. She is currently (1990–1995) supported by a Research Scientist Development Award from The National Institute of Mental Health.     

Fossils that Change Everything We Know About Human Evolution (...Or Not)

Dramatic headlines touting new fossil discoveries often proclaim that our view of human evolution has been revolutionized. While this is occasionally the case, it is more often true that new fossils enrich our understanding of our own ancestry or answer scientific questions that could not be resolved with previous data. Even spectacular new discoveries, such as the now famous “hobbit” skeleton (Homo floresiensis), can usually be included in the human family tree without any significant change in the inferences about the phylogenetic relationships or taxonomic status of the rest of its members. It is a testament to the power of evolutionary theory and the careful comparative study of human and other fossils that what we know about human evolution changes so little, even when spectacular new discoveries are announced.     

Universal grammar and the Baldwin effect: a hypothesis and some philosophical consequences

Grammar is now widely regarded as a substantially biological phenomenon, yet the problem of language evolution remains a matter of controversy among Linguists, Cognitive Scientists, and Evolutionary Theorists alike. In this paper, I present a new theoretical argument for one particular hypothesis—that a “Language Acquisition Device” of the sort first posited by Noam Chomsky might have evolved via the so-called “Baldwin Effect”. Close attention to the workings of that mechanism, I argue, helps to explain a previously mysterious feature of the Language Acquisition Device—the sheer variety of languages it allows the child to learn—thereby revealing a far stronger case than adherents of the hypothesis have previously supposed. A further unheralded consequence of the hypothesis is a conceptual shift in the Chomskyan understanding of language, wherein the essentially public nature of language is freshly emphasised. This has the effect of bringing the Chomskyan view into closer accord with Saussurean accounts of language, as well as with recent trends in evolutionary theory.     

Primate vocal communication: a useful tool for understanding human speech and language evolution?

Language is a uniquely human trait, and questions of how and why it evolved have been intriguing scientists for years. Nonhuman primates (primates) are our closest living relatives, and their behavior can be used to estimate the capacities of our extinct ancestors. As humans and many primate species rely on vocalizations as their primary mode of communication, the vocal behavior of primates has been an obvious target for studies investigating the evolutionary roots of human speech and language. By studying the similarities and differences between human and primate vocalizations, comparative research has the potential to clarify the evolutionary processes that shaped human speech and language. This review examines some of the seminal and recent studies that contribute to our knowledge regarding the link between primate calls and human language and speech. We focus on three main aspects of primate vocal behavior: functional reference, call combinations, and vocal learning. Studies in these areas indicate that despite important differences, primate vocal communication exhibits some key features characterizing human language. They also indicate, however, that some critical aspects of speech, such as vocal plasticity, are not shared with our primate cousins. We conclude that comparative research on primate vocal behavior is a very promising tool for deepening our understanding of the evolution of human speech and language, but much is still to be done as many aspects of monkey and ape vocalizations remain largely unexplored.     

Opening the “Black Box”: The Genetic and Biochemical Basis of Eye Evolution

Eyes provide a rich narrative for understanding evolution, having attracted the attention of preeminent scientists and communicators alike. Until recently, this narrative has focused primarily on the evolution of eye structure and far less on biochemistry or genetics. Although eye biochemistry was once likened to an unknown “black box;” the flood of discoveries in biochemistry is now allowing an increasingly detailed understanding of the processes involved in vision. As a result, evolutionary comparative (“tree-thinking”) analyses that use these data currently allow a new and still unfolding narrative, both richer in detail and more comprehensive in scope. Rather than toppling evolutionary theory by finding irreducibly complex molecular machines, eye evolution provides detailed accounts of how natural processes tinker with existing genetic components, duplicating and recombining them, to yield complex, intricate, and highly functional eyes. Understanding the new biochemical narrative is critical for researchers and teachers alike, in order to answer anti-evolutionist claims, and to provide an up-to-date account of the state of knowledge on the subject of eye evolution.     

Evolutionary ontogenetic aspects of pathogenetics of chronic human diseases

This article is a review of scientific publications, in which issues of pathogenetics of multifactorial diseases (MFDs) are considered from the viewpoint of evolution and ontogeny. Concepts explaining significance of evolutionary processes in the formation of genetic architecture of human chronic diseases (“thrifty” genomes and phenotypes, “drifty genes,” decanalization) are analyzed. The roles of natural selection and genetic drift in the formation of hereditary diversity of genes for susceptibility to MFDs are considered. The modern concept of “disease ontogeny” (somatic mosaicism, loss of heterozygosity, paradominant inheritance, epigenetic variability) is discussed. It is demonstrated that the evolutionary and ontogenetic approaches to analysis of genimuc and other “-omic” data are essential for understanding the biology of diseases.     

Improving How Evolution Is Taught: Facilitating a Shift from Memorization to Evolutionary Thinking

In North America, public understanding and acceptance of evolution is alarmingly low. Moreover, acceptance rates are declining, and studies suggest that even students who have taken courses in evolution have the same misunderstandings as the general public. These data signal deficiencies in our educational system and provide a “call to arms” to improve how evolution is taught. Many studies show that student education can be improved by replacing lecture-based pedagogy with active learning approaches—where the role of students changes from passive note taking to active problem solving. Here, we describe changes made to a second-year undergraduate evolution course to facilitate a shift to active learning and improve student understanding of evolution. First, lectures were used only sparingly and were largely replaced by problem-solving activities. Second, standard textbooks were replaced by “popular” books applying evolutionary thinking to topics students encounter on a daily basis. Lastly, predefined laboratory exercises were replaced by student-designed and implemented research projects. These changes led to increased student engagement and enjoyment, improved understanding of evolution and ability to apply evolutionary thinking to biological problems, and increased student recognition that evolutionary thinking is important not only in the classroom but also in their daily lives.     

Human neuropsychology and the concept of culture

American anthropology is distinguished by a four-fields approach in which biological, cultural, archaeological, and linguistic dimensions of behavior are examined in evolutionary and cross-cultural perspective. Nevertheless, assumptions of mind-body dualism pervade scholarly thinking in anthropology and have prevented the development of a truly integrated science of human experience. This dualism is most exemplified by the lack of consideration of the role of the brain in both “physical” and “mental” processes, including phenomena labeled as cultural. In this paper, I review neural mechanisms of learning, communication, and emotion, and discuss the implications of these findings for culture theory. Lee Xenakis Blonder is an assistant professor in the Department of Behavioral Science and the Sanders-Brown Center on Aging, University of Kentucky Medical School, Lexington. She is currently examining the effects of stroke in different regions of the brain on language, nonverbal communication, and emotional processing in an attempt to better understand human brain and behavior relations. Recent publications include “Neuropsychological Functioning in Hemiparkinsonism” (with R. E. Gur, R. C. Gur, A. J. Saykin, and H. I. Hurtig),Brain and Cognition 9:244–257 (1989).     

Language as a multimodal phenomenon: implications for language learning,processing and evolution

Our understanding of the cognitive and neural underpinnings of language has traditionally been firmly based on spoken Indo-European languages and on language studied as speech or text. However, in face-to-face communication, language is multimodal: speech signals are invariably accompanied by visual information on the face and in manual gestures, and sign languages deploy multiple channels (hands, face and body) in utterance construction. Moreover, the narrow focus on spoken Indo-European languages has entrenched the assumption that language is comprised wholly by an arbitrary system of symbols and rules. However, iconicity (i.e. resemblance between aspects of communicative form and meaning) is also present: speakers use iconic gestures when they speak; many non-Indo-European spoken languages exhibit a substantial amount of iconicity in word forms and, finally, iconicity is the norm, rather than the exception in sign languages. This introduction provides the motivation for taking a multimodal approach to the study of language learning, processing and evolution, and discusses the broad implications of shifting our current dominant approaches and assumptions to encompass multimodal expression in both signed and spoken languages.     

Teaching Tree-Thinking to Undergraduate Biology Students

Evolution is the unifying principle of all biology, and understanding how evolutionary relationships are represented is critical for a complete understanding of evolution. Phylogenetic trees are the most conventional tool for displaying evolutionary relationships, and “tree-thinking” has been coined as a term to describe the ability to conceptualize evolutionary relationships. Students often lack tree-thinking skills, and developing those skills should be a priority of biology curricula. Many common student misconceptions have been described, and a successful instructor needs a suite of tools for correcting those misconceptions. I review the literature on teaching tree-thinking to undergraduate students and suggest how this material can be presented within an inquiry-based framework.     

The natural selection of altruistic traits

Proponents of the standard evolutionary biology paradigm explain human “altruism” in terms of either nepotism or strict reciprocity. On that basis our underlying nature is reduced to a function of inclusive fitness: human nature has to be totally selfish or nepotistic. Proposed here are three possible paths to giving costly aid to nonrelatives, paths that are controversial because they involve assumed pleiotropic effects or group selection. One path is pleiotropic subsidies that help to extend nepotistic helping behavior from close family to nonrelatives. Another is “warfare”—if and only if warfare recurred in the Paleolithic. The third and most plausible hypothesis is based on the morally based egalitarian syndrome of prehistoric hunter-gatherers, which reduced phenotypic variation at the within-group level, increased it at the between-group level, and drastically curtailed the advantages of free riders. In an analysis consistent with the fundamental tenets of evolutionary biology, these three paths are evaluated as explanations for the evolutionary development of a rather complicated human social nature. This paper (in a series of drafts) has profited from comments by Michael Boehm, Donald T. Campbell, Bruce Knauft, Jane Lancaster, Martin Muller, Peter J. Richerson, Gary Seaman, Craig Stanford, George Williams, Edward O. Wilson, David Sloan Wilson, and two reviewers for Human Nature. Christopher Boehm is a professor of anthropology and the director of the Jane Goodall Research Center, University of Southern California. His research interests in political anthropology concern egalitarianism, feuding, warfare, and conflict resolution (humans and chimpanzees). In biosocial anthropology he is interested in altruism, group selection, and decisions.     

“Force-Talk” in Evolutionary Explanation: Metaphors and Misconceptions

The notion of “pressure” as an evolutionary “force” that “causes” evolution is a pervasive linguistic feature of biology textbooks, journal articles, and student explanatory discourse. We investigated the consequences of using a textbook and curriculum that incorporate so-called force-talk. We examined the frequency with which biology majors spontaneously used notions of evolutionary “pressures” in their explanations, students’ definitions and explanations of what they meant when they used pressures, and the structure of explanatory models that incorporated evolutionary pressures and forces. We found that 12–20 percent of undergraduates spontaneously used “pressures” and/or “forces” as explanatory factors but significantly more often in trait gain scenarios than in trait loss scenarios. The majority of explanations using “force-talk” were characterized by faulty evolutionary reasoning. We discuss the conceptual similarity between faulty notions of evolutionary pressures and linguists’ force-dynamic models of everyday reasoning and ultimately question the appropriateness of force-talk in evolution education.     

«Active» selection may participate in the evolution of primates

Selection pressures in the evolution of morphological characters which are exclusive to primates were discussed. While the evolutionary change in some morphological characters of primates can be explained by natural or sexual selection, there are also morphological characters of primates, such as some regions of neocortices, which are involved in social interactions and whose evolutionary changes can hardly be explained by natural or sexual selection alone. Furthermore, recent studies have demonstrated that relative sizes of brain, neocortex and some thalamic nuclei of brains differ significantly by social structure in primates. Based on these and other findings, we propose here that “active” selection pressures may have favored a variety of morphological characters related to social interactions, the selection pressures which are derived from social interactions and are operative within animals or troops. The introduction of concept of active selection will be useful in developing conceptual frameworks for understanding of the mechanism of evolution of primates, in particular, of hominids.     

Don’t Call it “Darwinism”

Evolutionary biology owes much to Charles Darwin, whose discussions of common descent and natural selection provide the foundations of the discipline. But evolutionary biology has expanded well beyond its foundations to encompass many theories and concepts unknown in the 19th century. The term “Darwinism” is, therefore, ambiguous and misleading. Compounding the problem of “Darwinism” is the hijacking of the term by creationists to portray evolution as a dangerous ideology—an “ism”—that has no place in the science classroom. When scientists and teachers use “Darwinism” as synonymous with evolutionary biology, it reinforces such a misleading portrayal and hinders efforts to present the scientific standing of evolution accurately. Accordingly, the term “Darwinism” should be abandoned as a synonym for evolutionary biology.     

Middle Childhood and Modern Human Origins

The evolution of modern human life history has involved substantial changes in the overall length of the subadult period, the introduction of a novel early childhood stage, and many changes in the initiation, termination, and character of the other stages. The fossil record is explored for evidence of this evolutionary process, with a special emphasis on middle childhood, which many argue is equivalent to the juvenile stage of African apes. Although the “juvenile” and “middle childhood” stages appear to be the same from a broad comparative perspective, in that they begin with the eruption of the first molar and the achievement of the majority of adult brain size and end with sexual maturity, the detailed differences in the expression of these two stages, and how they relate to the preceding and following stages, suggest that a distinction should be maintained between them to avoid blurring subtle, but important, differences.     

Blogging Evolution

A weblog (“blog”) is an publication on the WorldWideWeb in which brief entries are displayed in date order, much like a diary or journal. I describe the general characteristics of blogs, contrasting blogs with other of WWW formats for self-publishing. I describe four categories for blogs about evolutionary biology: “professional,” “amateur,” “apostolic,” and “imaginative.” I also discuss blog networks. I identify paradigms of each category. Throughout, I aim to illuminate blogs about evolutionary biology from the point of view of a user looking for information about the topic. I conclude that blogs are not the best type of source for systematic and authoritative information about evolution, and that they are best used by the information-seeker as a way of identifying what issues are of interest in the community of evolutionists and for generating research leads or fresh insights on one’s own work.

Saltational evolution: hopeful monsters are here to stay

Since 150 years it is hypothesized now that evolution always proceeds in a countless number of very small steps (Darwin in On the origin of species by means of natural selection or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle of life, Murray, London, 1859), a view termed “gradualism”. Few contemporary biologists will doubt that gradualism reflects the most frequent mode of evolution, but whether it is the only one remains controversial. It has been suggested that in some cases profound (“saltational”) changes may have occurred within one or a few generations of organisms. Organisms with a profound mutant phenotype that have the potential to establish a new evolutionary lineage have been termed “hopeful monsters”. Recently I have reviewed the concept of hopeful monsters in this journal mainly from a historical perspective, and provided some evidence for their past and present existence. Here I provide a brief update on data and discussions supporting the view that hopeful monsters and saltational evolution are valuable biological concepts. I suggest that far from being mutually exclusive scenarios, both gradual and saltational evolution are required to explain the complexity and diversity of life on earth. In my view, gradual changes represent the usual mode of evolution, but are unlikely to be able to explain all key innovations and changes in body plans. Saltational changes involving hopeful monsters are probably very exceptional events, but since they have the potential to establish profound novelties sometimes facilitating adaptive radiations, they are of quite some importance, even if they would occur in any evolutionary lineage less than once in a million years. From that point of view saltational changes are not more bizarre scenarios of evolutionary change than whole genome duplications, endosymbiosis or impacts of meteorites. In conclusion I argue that the complete dismissal of saltational evolution is a major historical error of evolutionary biology tracing back to Darwin that needs to be rectified.     

The evolutionary origin of the vertebrate neural crest and its developmental gene regulatory network – insights from amphioxus

The neural crest is an embryonic cell population unique to vertebrates. During vertebrate embryogenesis, neural crest cells are first induced from the neural plate border; subsequently, they delaminate from the dorsal neural tube and migrate to their destination, where they differentiate into a wide variety of derivatives. The emergence of the neural crest is thought to be responsible for the evolution of many complex novel structures of vertebrates that are lacking in invertebrate chordates. Despite its central importance in understanding the origin of vertebrates, the evolutionary origin of the neural crest remains elusive. The basal chordate amphioxus (Branchiostoma floridae) occupies an outgroup position that is useful for investigating this question. In this review, I summarize recent genomic and comparative developmental studies between amphioxus and vertebrates and discuss their implications for the evolutionary origin of neural crest cells. I focus mainly on the origin of the gene regulatory network underlying neural crest development, and suggest several hypotheses regarding how this network could have been assembled during early vertebrate evolution.     

Considering Adaptation and the “Function” of Traits in the Classroom, Using Wiki Tools

The conceptual understanding of the process of adaptation (whereby a population becomes better suited to its environment over evolutionary time) is acknowledged to be a difficult one. Many studies have shown that there is an inherent misunderstanding of the term, which is often related to the learner adopting the common rather than biological usage of the term in the learner’s language. But understanding adaptation is essential to understanding evolution, and learners need to be encouraged to understand how to relate hypotheses of the “function” of a trait shown by an individual with the environment in which the individual lives. Here, I describe a practical which encourages a class of learners to create their own organisms, through a series of steps by which they create functional explanations of morphology and behavior. Using a branching process whereby groups of students are split into smaller and smaller subgroups, an artificial phylogeny is created. A wiki system is then used to emphasize how individual species and groups of species are related. The relationship of this practical to problems of tree-thinking is discussed.