A comparative analysis of the Darwin-Wallace papers and the development of the concept of natural selection

The classical theory of descent with modification by means of natural selection had no mother, but did have two English fathers, Charles Darwin (1809–1882) and Alfred Russel Wallace (1823–1913). In 1858,the Linnean Society of London published two contributions of these naturalists and acknowledged both authors as the proponents of a novel hypothesis on the driving force of organismic evolution. In the present report the most important sections of the Darwin-Wallace papers are summarized. This close reading of both publications reveals six striking differences in emphasis: Darwin and Wallace did not propose identical ideas. The species definitions of both authors are described and the further development of the concept of natural selection in wild populations is reviewed. It is shown that the contributions of A.R. Wallace, who died 90 years ago, are more significant than usually acknowledged. I conclude that natural selection's lesser known co-discoverer should be regarded as one of the most important pioneers of evolutionary biology, whose original contributions are underestimated by most contemporary scientists.     

The effect of teaching the nature of science on students’ acceptance and understanding of evolution: myth or reality?

The results of studies of the nature of science (NOS) as a factor that enhances students’ understanding of evolution have been inconclusive. Therefore, the main purpose of this study was to test the role of NOS instruction in enhancing students’ learning about evolution. We used a quasi-experimental design with pre- and post-tests to investigate the impact of teaching evolution with and without NOS in two classes with 15–16-year-old students, who were randomly assigned to these two classes. To measure their understanding of NOS and their acceptance and understanding of evolution, we used three different instruments that have been shown to generate reliable and valid inferences in comparable populations. The main results of this study were that, in the class in which the teaching of evolution included NOS instruction, the students’ understanding of NOS and their acceptance of evolution significantly improved. However, irrespective of the use of NOS instruction, both classes increased their understanding of evolution. These results support the claim that NOS instruction may influence students’ acceptance of evolution but not their understanding of evolution and natural selection.     

Sexual size dimorphism in caecilian amphibians: analysis, review and directions for future research

Sexual dimorphism, widespread in the animal kingdom, describes differences between the sexes in size, shape and many other traits. Sexual size dimorphism (SSD) plays a significant role in understanding life history evolution and mating systems. The snakelike morphology of limbless caecilian amphibians lacking obvious secondary sexual characters (in contrast to frogs and salamanders) impedes accurate intrasexual comparisons. In this study, sexual size dimorphism in the oviparous caecilian Ichthyophis cf. kohtaoensis, a phylogenetically basal caecilian, was analysed. Females were larger in all body and head characters tested. However, when adjusted to body size (total length), females differed only in their cloacal shape. Clutch volume was positively correlated to female body size, thus female fecundity increased with body size supporting the hypothesis of a fecundity-selected SSD in the oviparous Ichthyophis cf. kohtaoensis. A review of the present SSD data for caecilians shows that many species are monomorphic for body size but show dimorphism in head size, while other species demonstrate female-biased SSD. Male-biased SSD has not been reported for caecilians. To understand life history evolution in caecilians, further studies on the reproductive biology of other taxa are urgently needed, in particular for rhinatrematids and uraeotyphlids. New data will allow phylogenetically controlled comparative analyses to fully explore the pattern of SSD among caecilian lineages.     

A mechanism and its metaphysics: An evolutionary account of the social and conceptual development of science

The claim that conceptual systems change is a platitude. That our conceptual systems are theory-laden is no less platitudinous. Given evolutionary theory, biologists are led to divide up the living world into genes, organisms, species, etc. in a particular way. No theory-neutral individuation of individuals or partitioning of these individuals into natural kinds is possible. Parallel observations should hold for philosophical theories about scientific theories. In this paper I summarize a theory of scientific change which I set out in considerable detail in a book that I shall publish in the near future. Just as few scientists were willing to entertain the view that species evolve in the absence of a mechanism capable of explaining this change, so philosophers should be just as reticent about accepting a parallel view of conceptual systems in science evolving in the absence of a mechanism to explain this evolution. In this paper I set out such a mechanism. One reason that this task has seemed so formidable in the past is that we have all construed conceptual systems inappropriately. If we are to understand the evolution of conceptual systems in science, we must interpret them as forming lineages related by descent. In my theory, the notion of a family resemblance is taken literally, not metaphorically. In my book, I set out data to show that the mechanism which I propose is actually operative. In this paper, such data is assumed.I wish to thank both Michael Ruse and Ronald Giere for suggesting improvements in an early draft of this paper. This paper is an abstract of a very long book. The number of people who helped me in developing the ideas set out in this book is extremely large, so large that I decided to defer expressing my gratitude to them until its appearance.     

The synthetic theory of evolution: general problems and the German contribution to the synthesis

Summary A metatheoretical and historiographical re-analysis of the Evolutionary Synthesis (the process) and the Synthetic Theory (the result) leads to the following conclusion: The Synthetic Theory is not a reductionistic, but rather a structuralistic theory with a limited range of relevant hierarchical levels. Historically the Synthesis was not a sudden event but a rational long-term project carried out between 1930 and 1950 by a large number of biologists in several countries. In the second part of our paper the contributions of several German biologists to the Synthesis are analyzed.     

Clinical application of three-dimensional echocardiography: past, present and future

Significant advances in three-dimensional echocardiography have made this modality a powerful diagnostic tool in the cardiology clinic. It can provide accurate and reliable measurements of chamber size and function, including the quantification of left ventricular mechanical dyssynchrony to guide patient selection for cardiac resynchron-isation therapy. Furthermore, three-dimensional echocardiography offers novel views and comprehensive anatomic definition of valvular and congenital abnormalities, improving diagnosis and preoperative planning. In addition, it is extremely useful in monitoring the effectiveness of surgical or percutaneous transcatheter interventions. As its efficacy for more and more clinical applications is demonstrated, it is clear that three-dimensional echocardiography has become part of the routine clinical diagnostic armamentarium. In this article, we describe the development of three-dimensional echocardiography over the last decades, review the scientific evidence for its current clinical use and discuss potential future applications. (Neth Heart J 2009;17:18-24.)     

The evolution of body size in birds. II. The role of reproductive power

Given that body mass evolves non-randomly in birds, it is important to ask what factors might be responsible. One suggestion is that the rate at which individuals turn resources into offspring, termed reproductive power, might explain this non-randomness. This is because, in mammals, the body mass with the highest reproductive power is the most common (modal) one. Reproductive power was estimated for birds from data on energetic content of eggs and population productivity. According to the formulation of Brown et al. (1993), reproductive power is composed of two component processes: acquisition (acquiring resources and storing them in reproductive biomass) and conversion (converting reproductive biomass into offspring). As with mammals, estimates of reproductive power indicate that the most common body mass in birds is also the body mass that maximizes reproductive power. The relationship between reproductive power and diversity is different for species smaller than this modal body mass when compared to those that are larger. The relationship of body mass and reproductive power is different between birds and mammals in two ways: (1) the body mass that maximizes reproductive power is smaller in birds (33g) than in mammals (100g), and (2) mammals generate more reproductive power than an equivalent-sized bird. Reproductive power is determined primarily by acquisition in small birds and mammals, while it is determined by conversion in the largest birds and mammals. It is likely that reproductive power is closely tied to the evolution and diversification of body masses because it constrains the ways in which traits affecting fitness can evolve.     

Fluctuating asymmetry and developmental instability in evolutionary biology: past, present and future

The role of developmental instability (DI), as measured by fluctuating asymmetry (FA), in evolutionary biology has been the focus of a wealth of research for more than half a century. In spite of this long period and many published papers, our current state of knowledge reviewed here only allows us to conclude that patterns are heterogeneous and that very little is known about the underlying causes of this heterogeneity. In addition, the statistical properties of FA as a measure of DI are only poorly grasped because of a general lack of understanding of the underlying mechanisms that drive DI. If we want to avoid that this area of research becomes abandoned, more efforts should be made to understand the observed heterogeneity, and attempts should be made to develop a unifying statistical protocol. More specifically, and perhaps most importantly, it is argued here that more attention should be paid to the usefulness of FA as a measure of DI since many factors might blur this relationship. Furthermore, the genetic architecture, associations with fitness and the importance of compensatory growth should be investigated under a variety of stress situations. In addition, more focus should be directed to the underlying mechanisms of DI as well as how these processes map to the observable phenotype. These insights could yield more efficient statistical models and a unified approach to the analysis of patterns in FA and DI. The study of both DI and canalization is indispensable to obtain better insights in their possible common origin, especially because both have been suggested to play a role in both micro- and macro-evolutionary processes.     

Naturalists, Molecular Biologists, and the Challenges of Molecular Evolution

Biologists and historians often present natural history and molecular biology as distinct, perhaps conflicting, fields in biological research. Such accounts, although supported by abundant evidence, overlook important areas of overlap between these areas. Focusing upon examples drawn particularly from systematics and molecular evolution, I argue that naturalists and molecular biologists often share questions, methods, and forms of explanation. Acknowledging these interdisciplinary efforts provides a more balanced account of the development of biology during the post-World War II era. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Domestication, genomics and the future for banana

BACKGROUND: Cultivated bananas and plantains are giant herbaceous plants within the genus Musa. They are both sterile and parthenocarpic so the fruit develops without seed. The cultivated hybrids and species are mostly triploid (2n = 3x = 33; a few are diploid or tetraploid), and most have been propagated from mutants found in the wild. With a production of 100 million tons annually, banana is a staple food across the Asian, African and American tropics, with the 15 % that is exported being important to many economies. SCOPE: There are well over a thousand domesticated Musa cultivars and their genetic diversity is high, indicating multiple origins from different wild hybrids between two principle ancestral species. However, the difficulty of genetics and sterility of the crop has meant that the development of new varieties through hybridization, mutation or transformation was not very successful in the 20th century. Knowledge of structural and functional genomics and genes, reproductive physiology, cytogenetics, and comparative genomics with rice, Arabidopsis and other model species has increased our understanding of Musa and its diversity enormously. CONCLUSIONS: There are major challenges to banana production from virulent diseases, abiotic stresses and new demands for sustainability, quality, transport and yield. Within the genepool of cultivars and wild species there are genetic resistances to many stresses. Genomic approaches are now rapidly advancing in Musa and have the prospect of helping enable banana to maintain and increase its importance as a staple food and cash crop through integration of genetical, evolutionary and structural data, allowing targeted breeding, transformation and efficient use of Musa biodiversity in the future.     

Peter Holland,homeobox genes,and the developmental basis of animal diversity

In 1867 Alexander Kowalevsky published an account of the development of the cephalochordate Amphioxus lanceolatus (now known as Branchiostoma lanceolatum) (Kowalevsky, 1867). Together with his study of the development of urochordates (Kowalevsky, 1866; 1871), this introduced a new way of thinking about the relationship between the evolution and development of animals, and established the basis for long-standing theories of the evolutionary origin of vertebrates. Some one hundred and fifty years later, cephalochordates and urochordates are again in the spotlight, as molecular biology and genome sequencing promise further revelations about the origin of vertebrates. The work of the 2006 Kowalevsky Medal winner, Peter Holland (Fig. 1), has played a central role in their reinstatement (see Mikhailov and Gilbert (2002) for more details of the history of the Kowalevsky Medal). Here, I profile Peter Holland’s contribution to the rebirth of Evolutionary Developmental Biology in general and the study of homeobox genes and vertebrate origins in particular.     

The contribution of ancestry,chance, and past and ongoing selection to adaptive evolution

The relative contributions of ancestry, chance, and past and ongoing election to variation in one adaptive (larval feeding rate) and one seemingly nonadaptive (pupation height) trait were determined in populations ofDrosophila melanogaster adapting to either low or high larval densities in the laboratory. Larval feeding rates increased rapidly in response to high density, and the effects of ancestry, past selection and chance were ameliorated by ongoing selection within 15–20 generations. Similarly, in populations previously kept at high larval density, and then switched to low larval density, the decline of larval feeding rate to ancestral levels was rapid (15-20 generations) and complete, providing support for a previously stated hypothesis regarding the costs of faster feeding inDrosophila larvae. Variation among individuals was the major contributor to variation in pupation height, a trait that would superficially appear to be nonadaptive in the environmental context of the populations used in this study because it did not diverge between sets of populations kept at low versus high larval density for many generations. However, the degree of divergence among populations (FST) for pupation height was significantly less than expected for a selectively neutral trait, and we integrate results from previous studies to suggest that the variation for pupation height among populations is constrained by stabilizing selection, with a flat, plateau-like fitness function that, consequently, allows for substantial phenotypic variation within populations. Our results support the view that the genetic imprints of history (ancestry and past selection) in outbreeding sexual populations are typically likely to be transient in the face of ongoing selection and recombination. The results also illustrate the heuristic point that different forms of selection-for example directional versus stabilizing selection—acting on a trait in different populations may often not be due to differently shaped fitness functions, but rather due to differences in how the fitness function maps onto the actual distribution of phenotypes in a given population. We discuss these results in the light of previous work on reverse evolution, and the role of ancestry, chance, and past and ongoing selection in adaptive evolution.