Genetic conflicts of interest in plants

Several features of the reproductive biology of seed plants have recently been explained using kin-selection interpretations. The simultaneous presence of tissues with different genetic make-ups during several phases of a seed-plant's life cycle is a feature that sets the conditions for agonistic interactions among selfish genes. The available empirical evidence indicates that genetic conflicts of interest are prevalent phenomena in seed plants. Recent research on the patterns of endosperm gene transmission provides a framework for new interpretations of the role of inclusive fitness in plants.     

Bioethics and conflicts of interest

Bioethics has been subject to considerable social criticism in recent years. One criticism that has caused particular discomfort in the bioethics community is that bioethicists, because of the way their work is funded, are involved in profound conflicts of interest that undermine their title to be considered independent moral commentators on developments in biomedicine and biotechnology. This criticism draws its force from the assumption that bioethics is, or ought to be, a type of normative social criticism. Versions of this criticism come from both the political left and right. For instance, such criticisms include allegations that bioethics is inherently socially conservative, that it is inherently “pro-technology”, that it lays spurious claims to moral and social authority and expertise, that its focus on autonomy links it to neoliberal theories of choice, and that it is an ideological mystification of real social relationships and political power. This commentary paper analyses the problem of bioethical conflict of interest, and argues that the types of conflict of interest facing bioethics are inherent to the role of “public intellectual” that bioethicists generally wish to assume. The paper defends this conception of the role of the bioethicist, arguing that bioethicists should be interested and openly so.     

Regulation of financial conflicts of interest in medical practice and medical research: a damaging solution in search of a problem

The free market, which includes most practicing physicians, publicly supported biomedical researchers, and private drug and device companies, has succeeded spectacularly in delivering new medical technologies to the public. Increased interactions between doctors (physicians and biomedical researchers), epitomized by the founding of the biotechnology revolution, have and can continue to accelerate this delivery. A powerful anti-commercial advocacy movement that has blossomed over the past 20 years threatens this momentum. This movement has succeeded in inverting reality by demonizing the market and by promoting distorted and damaging views of professionalism and of science. Most ominously, it has imposed onerous and counterproductive regulations on medical education and translational research.     

Evolutionary conflicts of interest between males and females

Sexual conflict arises from differences in the evolutionary interests of males and females and can occur over traits related to courtship, mating and fertilisation through to parental investment. Theory shows that sexual conflict can lead to sexually antagonistic coevolution (SAC), where adaptation in one sex can lead to counter-adaptation in the other. Thus, sexual conflict can lead to evolutionary change within species. In addition, SAC can--through its effects on traits related to the probability of mating and of zygote formation--potentially lead to reproductive isolation. In this review, I discuss that, although sexual conflict is ubiquitous, the actual expression of sexual conflict leading to SAC is less frequent. The balance between the benefits and costs of the manipulation of one sex by the other, and the availability of mechanisms by which conflict is expressed, determine whether actual sexual conflict is likely to occur. New insights address the relationship between sexual conflict and conflict resolution, adaptation, sexual selection and fitness. I suggest that it will be useful to examine systematically the parallels and contrasts between sexual and other evolutionary conflicts. Understanding why some traits, but not others, are subject to evolutionary change by SAC will require data on the mechanisms of the traits involved and on the relative benefits and costs of manipulation and resistance to manipulation.     

Reporting science and conflicts of interest in the lay press

Background

Forthright reporting of financial ties and conflicts of interest of researchers is associated with public trust in and esteem for the scientific enterprise.

Methods/Principal Findings

We searched Lexis/Nexis Academic News for the top news stories in science published in 2004 and 2005. We conducted a content analysis of 1152 newspaper stories. Funders of the research were identified in 38% of stories, financial ties of the researchers were reported in 11% of stories, and 5% reported financial ties of sources quoted. Of 73 stories not reporting on financial ties, 27% had financial ties publicly disclosed in scholarly journals.

Conclusions/Significance

Because science journalists often did not report conflict of interest information, adherence to gold-standard recommendations for science journalism was low. Journalists work under many different constraints, but nonetheless news reports of scientific research were incomplete, potentially eroding public trust in science.     

Trade-offs, conflicts of interest and manipulation in Plasmodium-mosquito interactions

A long-held view among parasitologists is that infection by malaria parasites does not harm the mosquito vector. One of the reasons for this belief is that the two partners of the association share interests in the most important life-history traits of the mosquito. Both partners benefit from increased survival and an increased rate of bloodfeeding the mosquito to increase its reproductive success and the parasite to ensure its transmission. Problems with this line of reasoning appear when one considers possible trade-offs among the mosquito's life-history parameters, which constrain the attempts by the mosquito and the parasite to maximize their success. Could these constraints differ between the two partners and thus lead to conflicts of interest and what would be the evolutionary and epidemiological consequences of conflicting interests? These questions will be investigated below.