The genome‐centric concept: resynthesis of evolutionary theory

Modern biology has been heavily influenced by the gene‐centric concept. Paradoxically, this very concept – on which bioresearch is based – is challenged by the success of gene‐based research in terms of explaining evolutionary theory. To overcome this major roadblock, it is essential to establish new theories, to not only solve the key puzzles presented by the gene‐centric concept, but also to provide a conceptual framework that allows the field to grow. This paper discusses a number of paradoxes and illustrates how they can be addressed by the genome‐centric concept in order to further resynthesize evolutionary theory. In particular, methodological breakthroughs that analyze genome evolution are discussed. The multiple interactions among different levels of a complex system provide the key to understanding the relationship between self‐organization and natural selection. Darwinian natural selection applies to the biological level due to its unique genetic and heterogeneous features, but does not simply or directly apply to either the lower non‐living level or higher intellectual society level. At the complex bio‐system level, the genome context (the entire package of genes and their genomic physical relationship or genomic topology), not the individual genes, defines the system and serves as the principle selection platform for evolution.     

Probabilistic causation and the explanatory role of natural selection

The explanatory role of natural selection is one of the long-term debates in evolutionary biology. Nevertheless, the consensus has been slippery because conceptual confusions and the absence of a unified, formal causal model that integrates different explanatory scopes of natural selection. In this study we attempt to examine two questions: (i) What can the theory of natural selection explain? and (ii) Is there a causal or explanatory model that integrates all natural selection explananda? For the first question, we argue that five explananda have been assigned to the theory of natural selection and that four of them may be actually considered explananda of natural selection. For the second question, we claim that a probabilistic conception of causality and the statistical relevance concept of explanation are both good models for understanding the explanatory role of natural selection. We review the biological and philosophical disputes about the explanatory role of natural selection and formalize some explananda in probabilistic terms using classical results from population genetics. Most of these explananda have been discussed in philosophical terms but some of them have been mixed up and confused. We analyze and set the limits of these problems.     

MATHEMATICS OF KIN‐ AND GROUP‐SELECTION: FORMALLY EQUIVALENT?

Evolutionary game theory is a general mathematical framework that describes the evolution of social traits. This framework forms the basis of many multilevel selection models and is also frequently used to model evolutionary dynamics on networks. Kin selection, which was initially restricted to describe social interactions between relatives, has also led to a broader mathematical approach, inclusive fitness, that can not only describe social evolution among relatives, but also in group structured populations or on social networks. It turns out that the underlying mathematics of game theory is fundamentally different from the approach of inclusive fitness. Thus, both approaches—evolutionary game theory and inclusive fitness—can be helpful to understand the evolution of social traits in group structured or spatially extended populations.     

What good is genomic imprinting: the function of parent-specific gene expression

Parent-specific gene expression (genomic imprinting) is an evolutionary puzzle because it forgoes an important advantage of diploidy--protection against the effects of deleterious recessive mutations. Three hypotheses claim to have found a countervailing selective advantage of parent-specific expression. Imprinting is proposed to have evolved because it enhances evolvability in a changing environment, protects females against the ravages of invasive trophoblast, or because natural selection acts differently on genes of maternal and paternal origin in interactions among kin. The last hypothesis has received the most extensive theoretical development and seems the best supported by the properties of known imprinted genes. However, the hypothesis is yet to provide a compelling explanation for many examples of imprinting.     

Sexual selection: Another Darwinian process

Why was sexual selection so important to Darwin? And why was it de-emphasized by almost all of Darwin's followers until the second half of the 20th century? These two questions shed light on the complexity of the scientific tradition named “Darwinism”. Darwin's interest in sexual selection was almost as old as his discovery of the principle of natural selection. From the beginning, sexual selection was just another “natural means of selection”, although different from standard “natural selection” in its mechanism. But it took Darwin 30 years to fully develop his theory, from the early notebooks to the 1871 book The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. Although there is a remarkable continuity in his basic ideas about sexual selection, he emphasized increasingly the idea that sexual selection could oppose the action of natural selection and be non adaptive. In time, he also gave more weight to mate choice (especially female choice), giving explicit arguments in favor of psychological notions such as “choice” and “aesthetic sense”. But he also argued that there was no strict demarcation line between natural and sexual selection, a major difficulty of the theory from the beginning. Female choice was the main reason why Alfred Russel Wallace, the co-discoverer of the principle of natural selection, engaged in a major controversy with Darwin about sexual selection. Wallace was suspicious about sexual selection in general, trying to minimize it by all sorts of arguments. And he denied entirely the existence of female choice, because he thought that it was both unnecessary and an anthropomorphic notion. This had something to do with his spiritualist convictions, but also with his conception of natural selection as a sufficient principle for the evolutionary explanation of all biological phenomena (except for the origin of mind). This is why Wallace proposed to redefine Darwinism in a way that excluded Darwin's principle of sexual selection. The main result of the Darwin–Wallace controversy was that most Darwinian biologists avoided the subject of sexual selection until at least the 1950 s, Ronald Fisher being a major exception. This controversy still deserves attention from modern evolutionary biologists, because the modern approach inherits from both Darwin and Wallace. The modern approach tends to present sexual selection as a special aspect of the theory of natural selection, although it also recognizes the big difficulties resulting from the inevitable interaction between these two natural processes of selection. And contra Wallace, it considers mate choice as a major process that deserves a proper evolutionary treatment. The paper's conclusion explains why sexual selection can be taken as a test case for a proper assessment of “Darwinism” as a scientific tradition. Darwin's and Wallace's attitudes towards sexual selection reveal two different interpretations of the principle of natural selection: Wallace's had an environmentalist conception of natural selection, whereas Darwin was primarily sensitive to the element of competition involved in the intimate mechanism of any natural process of selection. Sexual selection, which can lack adaptive significance, reveals this exemplarily.     

Polygenic traits and parasite local adaptation

The extent to which parasites are locally adapted to their hosts has important implications for human health and agriculture. A recently developed conceptual framework--the geographic mosaic theory of coevolution--predicts that local maladaptation should be common and largely determined by the interplay between gene flow and spatially variable reciprocal selection. Previous investigation of this theory has predominately focused on genetic systems of infection and resistance characterized by few genes of major effect and particular forms of epistasis. Here we extend existing theory by analyzing mathematical models of host-parasite interactions in which host resistance to parasites is mediated by quantitative traits with an additive polygenic basis. In contrast to previous theoretical studies predicated upon major gene mechanisms, we find that parasite local maladaptation is quite uncommon and restricted to one specific functional form of host resistance. Furthermore, our results show that local maladaptation should be rare or absent in studies that measure local adaptation using reciprocal transplant designs conducted in natural environments. Our results thus narrow the scope over which the predictions of the geographic mosaic theory are likely to hold and provide novel and readily testable predictions about when and where local maladaptation is expected.     

Evidence that Natural Selection is the Primary Cause of the Guanine-cytosine Content Variation in Rice Genes

Cereal genes are classified into two distinct classes according to the guanine-cytosine(GC)content at the third codonsites(GC_3).Natural selection and mutation bias have been proposed to affect the GC content.However,there has beencontroversy about the cause of GC variation.Here,we characterized the GC content of 1092 paralogs and other single-copygenes in the duplicated chromosomal regions of the rice genome(ssp.indica)and classified the paralogs into GC_3-richand GC_3-poor groups.By referring to out-group sequences from Arabidopsis and maize,we confirmed that the averagesynonymous substitution rate of the GC_3-rich genes is significantly lower than that of the GC_3-poor genes.Furthermore,we explored the other possible factors corresponding to the GC variation including the length of coding sequences,thenumber of exons in each gene,the number of genes in each family,the location of genes on chromosomes and the proteinfunctions.Consequently,we propose that natural selection rather than mutation bias was the primary cause of the GCvariation.     

Social semantics: how useful has group selection been?

In our social semantics review (J. Evol. Biol., 2007, 415–432), we discussed some of the misconceptions and sources of confusion associated with group selection. Wilson (2007, this issue) claims that we made three errors regarding group selection. Here, we aim to expand upon the relevant points from our review in order to refute this claim. The last 45 years of research provide clear evidence of the relative use of the kin and group selection approaches. Kin selection methodologies are more tractable, allowing the construction of models that can be applied more easily to specific biological examples, including those chosen by Wilson to illustrate the utility of the group selection approach. In contrast, the group selection approach is not only less useful, but also appears to frequently have negative consequences by fostering confusion that leads to wasted effort. More generally, kin selection theory allows the construction of a unified conceptual overview that can be applied across all taxa, whereas there is no formal theory of group selection.     

Evidence that Natural Selection is the Primary Cause of the Guanine-cytosine Content Variation in Rice Genes

Cereal genes are classified into two distinct classes according to the guanine-cytosine （GC） content at the third codon sites （GC3）. Natural selection and mutation bias have been proposed to affect the GC content. However, there has been controversy about the cause of GC variation. Here, we characterized the GC content of 1 092 paralogs and other single-copy genes in the duplicated chromosomal regions of the rice genome （ssp. indica） and classified the paralogs into GC3-rich and GC3-poor groups. By referring to out-group sequences from Arabidopsis and maize, we confirmed that the average synonymous substitution rate of the GC3-rich genes is significantly lower than that of the GC3-poor genes. Furthermore, we explored the other possible factors corresponding to the GC variation including the length of coding sequences, the number of exons in each gene, the number of genes in each family, the location of genes on chromosomes and the protein functions. Consequently, we propose that natural selection rather than mutation bias was the primary cause of the GC variation.     

Fluctuating selection: the perpetual renewal of adaptation in variable environments

Darwin insisted that evolutionary change occurs very slowly over long periods of time, and this gradualist view was accepted by his supporters and incorporated into the infinitesimal model of quantitative genetics developed by R. A. Fisher and others. It dominated the first century of evolutionary biology, but has been challenged in more recent years both by field surveys demonstrating strong selection in natural populations and by quantitative trait loci and genomic studies, indicating that adaptation is often attributable to mutations in a few genes. The prevalence of strong selection seems inconsistent, however, with the high heritability often observed in natural populations, and with the claim that the amount of morphological change in contemporary and fossil lineages is independent of elapsed time. I argue that these discrepancies are resolved by realistic accounts of environmental and evolutionary changes. First, the physical and biotic environment varies on all time-scales, leading to an indefinite increase in environmental variance over time. Secondly, the intensity and direction of natural selection are also likely to fluctuate over time, leading to an indefinite increase in phenotypic variance in any given evolving lineage. Finally, detailed long-term studies of selection in natural populations demonstrate that selection often changes in direction. I conclude that the traditional gradualist scheme of weak selection acting on polygenic variation should be supplemented by the view that adaptation is often based on oligogenic variation exposed to commonplace, strong, fluctuating natural selection.     

Selectionism and neutralism in molecular evolution

Charles Darwin proposed that evolution occurs primarily by natural selection, but this view has been controversial from the beginning. Two of the major opposing views have been mutationism and neutralism. Early molecular studies suggested that most amino acid substitutions in proteins are neutral or nearly neutral and the functional change of proteins occurs by a few key amino acid substitutions. This suggestion generated an intense controversy over selectionism and neutralism. This controversy is partially caused by Kimura's definition of neutrality, which was too strict (|2Ns|< or =1). If we define neutral mutations as the mutations that do not change the function of gene products appreciably, many controversies disappear because slightly deleterious and slightly advantageous mutations are engulfed by neutral mutations. The ratio of the rate of nonsynonymous nucleotide substitution to that of synonymous substitution is a useful quantity to study positive Darwinian selection operating at highly variable genetic loci, but it does not necessarily detect adaptively important codons. Previously, multigene families were thought to evolve following the model of concerted evolution, but new evidence indicates that most of them evolve by a birth-and-death process of duplicate genes. It is now clear that most phenotypic characters or genetic systems such as the adaptive immune system in vertebrates are controlled by the interaction of a number of multigene families, which are often evolutionarily related and are subject to birth-and-death evolution. Therefore, it is important to study the mechanisms of gene family interaction for understanding phenotypic evolution. Because gene duplication occurs more or less at random, phenotypic evolution contains some fortuitous elements, though the environmental factors also play an important role. The randomness of phenotypic evolution is qualitatively different from allele frequency changes by random genetic drift. However, there is some similarity between phenotypic and molecular evolution with respect to functional or environmental constraints and evolutionary rate. It appears that mutation (including gene duplication and other DNA changes) is the driving force of evolution at both the genic and the phenotypic levels.     

Fisher’s fundamental theorem of inclusive fitness and the change in fitness due to natural selection when conspecifics interact

Competition and cooperation is fundamental to evolution by natural selection, both in animals and plants. Here, I investigate the consequences of such interactions for response in fitness due to natural selection. I provide quantitative genetic expressions for heritable variance and response in fitness due to natural selection when conspecifics interact. Results show that interactions among conspecifics generate extra heritable variance in fitness, and that interacting with kin is the key to evolutionary success because it translates the extra heritable variance into response in fitness. This work also unifies Fisher’s fundamental theorem of natural selection (FTNS) and Hamilton’s inclusive fitness (IF). The FTNS implies that natural selection maximizes fitness, whereas Hamilton proposed maximization of IF. This work shows that the FTNS describes the increase in IF, rather than direct fitness, at a rate equal to the additive genetic variance in fitness. Thus, Hamilton’s IF and Fisher’s FTNS both describe the maximization of IF.     

PERSPECTIVE: THE THEORIES OF FISHER AND WRIGHT IN THE CONTEXT OF METAPOPULATIONS: WHEN NATURE DOES MANY SMALL EXPERIMENTS

We critically review the two major theories of adaptive evolution developed early in this century, Wright's shifting balance theory and Fisher's large population size theory, in light of novel findings from field observations, laboratory experiments, and theoretical research conducted over the past 15 years. Ecological studies of metapopulations have established that the processes of local extinction and colonization of demes are relatively common in natural populations of many species and theoretical population genetic models have shown that these ecological processes have genetic consequences within and among local demes. Within demes, random genetic drift converts nonadditive genetic variance into additive genetic variance, increasing, rather than limiting, the potential for adaptation to local environments. For this reason, the genetic differences that arise by drift among demes, can be augmented by local selection. The resulting adaptive differences in gene combinations potentially contribute to the genetic origin of new species. These and other recent findings were not discussed by either Wright or Fisher. For example, although Wright emphasized epistatic genetic variance, he did not discuss the conversion process. Similarly, Fisher did not discuss how the average additive effect of a gene varies among demes across a metapopulation whenever there is epistasis. We discuss the implications of such recent findings for the Wright-Fisher controversy and identify some critical open questions that require additional empirical and theoretical study.     

Natural selection in mimicry

Biological mimicry has served as a salient example of natural selection for over a century, providing us with a dazzling array of very different examples across many unrelated taxa. We provide a conceptual framework that brings together apparently disparate examples of mimicry in a single model for the purpose of comparing how natural selection affects models, mimics and signal receivers across different interactions. We first analyse how model–mimic resemblance likely affects the fitness of models, mimics and receivers across diverse examples. These include classic Batesian and Müllerian butterfly systems, nectarless orchids that mimic Hymenoptera or nectar‐producing plants, caterpillars that mimic inert objects unlikely to be perceived as food, plants that mimic abiotic objects like carrion or dung and aggressive mimicry where predators mimic food items of their own prey. From this, we construct a conceptual framework of the selective forces that form the basis of all mimetic interactions. These interactions between models, mimics and receivers may follow four possible evolutionary pathways in terms of the direction of selection resulting from model–mimic resemblance. Two of these pathways correspond to the selective pressures associated with what is widely regarded as Batesian and Müllerian mimicry. The other two pathways suggest mimetic interactions underpinned by distinct selective pressures that have largely remained unrecognized. Each pathway is characterized by theoretical differences in how model–mimic resemblance influences the direction of selection acting on mimics, models and signal receivers, and the potential for consequent (co)evolutionary relationships between these three protagonists. The final part of this review describes how selective forces generated through model–mimic resemblance can be opposed by the basic ecology of interacting organisms and how those forces may affect the symmetry, strength and likelihood of (co)evolution between the three protagonists within the confines of the four broad evolutionary possibilities. We provide a clear and pragmatic visualization of selection pressures that portrays how different mimicry types may evolve. This conceptual framework provides clarity on how different selective forces acting on mimics, models and receivers are likely to interact and ultimately shape the evolutionary pathways taken by mimetic interactions, as well as the constraints inherent within these interactions.     

Inference on the strength of balancing selection for epistatically interacting loci

Existing inference methods for estimating the strength of balancing selection in multi-locus genotypes rely on the assumption that there are no epistatic interactions between loci. Complex systems in which balancing selection is prevalent, such as sets of human immune system genes, are known to contain components that interact epistatically. Therefore, current methods may not produce reliable inference on the strength of selection at these loci. In this paper, we address this problem by presenting statistical methods that can account for epistatic interactions in making inference about balancing selection. A theoretical result due to Fearnhead (2006) is used to build a multi-locus Wright-Fisher model of balancing selection, allowing for epistatic interactions among loci. Antagonistic and synergistic types of interactions are examined. The joint posterior distribution of the selection and mutation parameters is sampled by Markov chain Monte Carlo methods, and the plausibility of models is assessed via Bayes factors. As a component of the inference process, an algorithm to generate multi-locus allele frequencies under balancing selection models with epistasis is also presented. Recent evidence on interactions among a set of human immune system genes is introduced as a motivating biological system for the epistatic model, and data on these genes are used to demonstrate the methods.     

Social traits,social networks and evolutionary biology

The social environment is both an important agent of selection for most organisms, and an emergent property of their interactions. As an aggregation of interactions among members of a population, the social environment is a product of many sets of relationships and so can be represented as a network or matrix. Social network analysis in animals has focused on why these networks possess the structure they do, and whether individuals’ network traits, representing some aspect of their social phenotype, relate to their fitness. Meanwhile, quantitative geneticists have demonstrated that traits expressed in a social context can depend on the phenotypes and genotypes of interacting partners, leading to influences of the social environment on the traits and fitness of individuals and the evolutionary trajectories of populations. Therefore, both fields are investigating similar topics, yet have arrived at these points relatively independently. We review how these approaches are diverged, and yet how they retain clear parallelism and so strong potential for complementarity. This demonstrates that, despite separate bodies of theory, advances in one might inform the other. Techniques in network analysis for quantifying social phenotypes, and for identifying community structure, should be useful for those studying the relationship between individual behaviour and group‐level phenotypes. Entering social association matrices into quantitative genetic models may also reduce bias in heritability estimates, and allow the estimation of the influence of social connectedness on trait expression. Current methods for measuring natural selection in a social context explicitly account for the fact that a trait is not necessarily the property of a single individual, something the network approaches have not yet considered when relating network metrics to individual fitness. Harnessing evolutionary models that consider traits affected by genes in other individuals (i.e. indirect genetic effects) provides the potential to understand how entire networks of social interactions in populations influence phenotypes and predict how these traits may evolve. By theoretical integration of social network analysis and quantitative genetics, we hope to identify areas of compatibility and incompatibility and to direct research efforts towards the most promising areas. Continuing this synthesis could provide important insights into the evolution of traits expressed in a social context and the evolutionary consequences of complex and nuanced social phenotypes.     

Laboratory models,causal explanation and group selection

We develop an account of laboratory models, which have been central to the group selection controversy. We compare arguments for group selection in nature with Darwin's arguments for natural selection to argue that laboratory models provide important grounds for causal claims about selection. Biologists get information about causes and cause-effect relationships in the laboratory because of the special role their own causal agency plays there. They can also get information about patterns of effects and antecedent conditions in nature. But to argue that some cause is actually responsible in nature, they require an inference from knowledge of causes in the laboratory context and of effects in the natural context. This process, cause detection, forms the core of an analogical argument for group selection. We discuss the differing roles of mathematical and laboratory models in constructing selective explanations at the group level and apply our discussion to the units of selection controversy to distinguish between the related problems of cause determination and evaluation of evidence. Because laboratory models are at the intersection of the two problems, their study is crucial for framing a coherent theory of explanation for evolutionary biology.     

GENE FLOW FROM DOMESTICATED SPECIES TO WILD RELATIVES: MIGRATION LOAD IN A MODEL OF MULTIVARIATE SELECTION

Domesticated species frequently spread their genes into populations of wild relatives through interbreeding. The domestication process often involves artificial selection for economically desirable traits. This can lead to an indirect response in unknown correlated traits and a reduction in fitness of domesticated individuals in the wild. Previous models for the effect of gene flow from domesticated species to wild relatives have assumed that evolution occurs in one dimension. Here, I develop a quantitative genetic model for the balance between migration and multivariate stabilizing selection. Different forms of correlational selection consistent with a given observed ratio between average fitness of domesticated and wild individuals offsets the phenotypic means at migration–selection balance away from predictions based on simpler one-dimensional models. For almost all parameter values, correlational selection leads to a reduction in the migration load. For ridge selection, this reduction arises because the distance the immigrants deviates from the local optimum in effect is reduced. For realistic parameter values, however, the effect of correlational selection on the load is small, suggesting that simpler one-dimensional models may still be adequate in terms of predicting mean population fitness and viability.     

Searching for Sympatric Speciation in the Genomic Era

Sympatric speciation illustrates how natural and sexual selection may create new species in isolation without geographic barriers. However, recent genomic reanalyses of classic examples of sympatric speciation reveal complex histories of secondary gene flow from outgroups into the radiation. In contrast, the rich theoretical literature on this process distinguishes among a diverse range of models based on simple genetic histories and different types of reproductive isolating barriers. Thus, there is a need to revisit how to connect theoretical models of sympatric speciation and their predictions to empirical case studies in the face of widespread gene flow. Here, theoretical differences among different types of sympatric speciation and speciation‐with‐gene‐flow models are reviewed and summarized, and genomic analyses are proposed for distinguishing which models apply to case studies based on the timing and function of adaptive introgression. Investigating whether secondary gene flow contributed to reproductive isolation is necessary to test whether predictions of theory are ultimately borne out in nature.     

Effect of balancing selection on spatial genetic structure within populations: theoretical investigations on the self-incompatibility locus and empirical studies in Arabidopsis halleri

The effect of selection on patterns of genetic structure within and between populations may be studied by contrasting observed patterns at the genes targeted by selection with those of unlinked neutral marker loci. Local directional selection on target genes will produce stronger population genetic structure than at neutral loci, whereas the reverse is expected for balancing selection. However, theoretical predictions on the intensity of this signal under precise models of balancing selection are still lacking. Using negative frequency-dependent selection acting on self-incompatibility systems in plants as a model of balancing selection, we investigated the effect of such selection on patterns of spatial genetic structure within a continuous population. Using numerical simulations, we tested the effect of the type of self-incompatibility system, the number of alleles at the self-incompatibility locus and the dominance interactions among them, the extent of gene dispersal, and the immigration rate on spatial genetic structure at the selected locus and at unlinked neutral loci. We confirm that frequency-dependent selection is expected to reduce the extent of spatial genetic structure as compared to neutral loci, particularly in situations with low number of alleles at the self-incompatibility locus, high frequency of codominant interactions among alleles, restricted gene dispersal and restricted immigration from outside populations. Hence the signature of selection on spatial genetic structure is expected to vary across species and populations, and we show that empirical data from the literature as well as data reported here on three natural populations of the herb Arabidopsis halleri confirm these theoretical results.