There must be a prokaryote somewhere: microbiology''s search for itself.

While early microbiologists showed considerable interest in the problem of the natural (evolutionary) relationships among prokaryotes, by the middle of this century that problem had largely been discarded as being unsolvable. In other words, the science of microbiology developed without an evolutionary framework, the lack of which kept it a weak discipline, defined largely by external forces. Modern technology has allowed microbiology finally to develop the needed evolutionary framework, and with this comes a sense of coherence, a sense of identity. Not only is this development radically changing microbiology itself, but also it will change microbiology's relationship to the other biological disciplines. Microbiology of the future will become the primary biological science, the base upon which our future understanding of the living world rests, and the font from which new understanding of it flows.     

Bioaltruism reconsidered

Altruistic behavior is often regarded as sociobiology's most central theoretical problem, but is it? Altruism in biology, bioaltruism, has many meanings, which can be grouped into two categories. The first I will callcommon bioaltruism. It is primarily of ethological relevance. The second,evolutionary bioaltruism, is a special category in evolutionary respects in that it may indeed pose a problem for evolutionary theory. These categories are logically independent. Moreover, both of them are logically different from altruism in its everyday psychological or moral sense. Sociobiological examples of bioaltruistic behavior concern bioaltruism in the first sense only, so the theoretical problem ‘altruism’ is supposed to pose, is indeed nothing but a theoretical problem and the bioaltruism that actually occurs has no evolutionary relevance. Nevertheless, evolutionary theory is relevant to our understanding of the possibility of common bioaltruism, and that possibility — even though bioaltruism is conceptually different from ethical altruism — is relevant for ethicists: it sheds light on what we can ask people to do or not to do.     

Paradigm change in evolutionary microbiology

Thomas Kuhn had little to say about scientific change in biological science, and biologists are ambivalent about how applicable his framework is for their disciplines. We apply Kuhn's account of paradigm change to evolutionary microbiology, where key Darwinian tenets are being challenged by two decades of findings from molecular phylogenetics. The chief culprit is lateral gene transfer, which undermines the role of vertical descent and the representation of evolutionary history as a tree of life. To assess Kuhn's relevance to this controversy, we add a social analysis of the scientists involved to the historical and philosophical debates. We conclude that while Kuhn's account may capture aspects of the pattern (or outcome) of an episode of scientific change, he has little to say about how the process of generating new understandings is occurring in evolutionary microbiology. Once Kuhn's application is limited to that of an initial investigative probe into how scientific problem-solving occurs, his disciplinary scope becomes broader.     

Should we stay or should we go: mechanisms and ecological consequences for biofilm dispersal

In most environments, bacteria reside primarily in biofilms, which are social consortia of cells that are embedded in an extracellular matrix and undergo developmental programmes resulting in a predictable biofilm 'life cycle'. Recent research on many different bacterial species has now shown that the final stage in this life cycle includes the production and release of differentiated dispersal cells. The formation of these cells and their eventual dispersal is initiated through diverse and remarkably sophisticated mechanisms, suggesting that there are strong evolutionary pressures for dispersal from an otherwise largely sessile biofilm. The evolutionary aspect of biofilm dispersal is now being explored through the integration of molecular microbiology with eukaryotic ecological and evolutionary theory, which provides a broad conceptual framework for the diversity of specific mechanisms underlying biofilm dispersal. Here, we review recent progress in this emerging field and suggest that the merging of detailed molecular mechanisms with ecological theory will significantly advance our understanding of biofilm biology and ecology.     

In What Sense Does ‘Nothing Make Sense Except in the Light of Evolution’?

Dobzhansky argued that biology only makes sense if life on earth has a shared history. But his dictum is often reinterpreted to mean that biology only makes sense in the light of adaptation. Some philosophers of science have argued in this spirit that all work in 'proximal' biosciences such as anatomy, physiology and molecular biology must be framed, at least implicitly, by the selection histories of the organisms under study. Others have denied this and have proposed non-evolutionary ways in which biologists can frame these investigations. This paper argues that an evolutionary perspective is indeed necessary, but that it must be a forward-looking perspective informed by a general understanding of the evolutionary process, not a backward-looking perspective informed by the specific evolutionary history of the species being studied. Interestingly, it turns out that there are aspects of proximal biology that even a creationist cannot study except in the light of a theory of their effect on future evolution.     

Phylogenetic approaches for studying diversification

Estimating rates of speciation and extinction, and understanding how and why they vary over evolutionary time, geographical space and species groups, is a key to understanding how ecological and evolutionary processes generate biological diversity. Such inferences will increasingly benefit from phylogenetic approaches given the ever‐accelerating rates of genetic sequencing. In the last few years, models designed to understand diversification from phylogenetic data have advanced significantly. Here, I review these approaches and what they have revealed about diversification in the natural world. I focus on key distinctions between different models, and I clarify the conclusions that can be drawn from each model. I identify promising areas for future research. A major challenge ahead is to develop models that more explicitly take into account ecology, in particular the interaction of species with each other and with their environment. This will not only improve our understanding of diversification; it will also present a new perspective to the use of phylogenies in community ecology, the science of interaction networks and conservation biology, and might shift the current focus in ecology on equilibrium biodiversity theories to non‐equilibrium theories recognising the crucial role of history.     

Challenges and opportunities for biogeography—What can we still learn from von Humboldt?

Alexander von Humboldt was arguably the most influential scientist of his day. Although his fame has since lessened relative to some of his contemporaries, we argue that his influence remains strong—mainly because his approach to science inspired others and was instrumental in furthering other scientific disciplines (such as evolution, through Darwin, and conservation science, through Muir)—and that he changed the way that large areas of science are done and communicated. Indeed, he has been called the father of a range of fields, including environmental science, earth system science, plant geography, ecology and conservation. His approach was characterized by making connections between non‐living and living nature (including humans), based on interdisciplinary thinking and informed by large amounts of data from systematic, accurate measurements in a geographical framework. Although his approach largely lacked an evolutionary perspective, he was fundamental to creating the circumstances for Darwin and Wallace to advance evolutionary science. He devoted considerable effort illustrating, communicating and popularizing science, centred on the excitement of pure science. In biogeography, his influence remains strong, including in relating climate to species distributions (e.g. biomes and latitudinal and elevational gradients) and in the use of remote sensing and species distribution modelling in macroecology. However, some key aspects of his approach have faded, particularly as science fragmented into specific disciplines and became more reductionist. We argue that asking questions in a more Humboldtian way is important for addressing current global challenges. This is well‐exemplified by researching links between geodiversity and biodiversity. Progress on this can be made by (a) systematic data collection to improve our knowledge of biodiversity and geodiversity around the world; (b) improving our understanding of the linkages between biodiversity and geodiversity; and (c) developing our understanding of the interactions of geological, biological, ecological, environmental and evolutionary processes in biogeography.     

PERSPECTIVE: COMPLEX ADAPTATIONS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EVOLVABILITY

The problem of complex adaptations is studied in two largely disconnected research traditions: evolutionary biology and evolutionary computer science. This paper summarizes the results from both areas and compares their implications. In evolutionary computer science it was found that the Darwinian process of mutation, recombination and selection is not universally effective in improving complex systems like computer programs or chip designs. For adaptation to occur, these systems must possess “evolvability,” i.e., the ability of random variations to sometimes produce improvement. It was found that evolvability critically depends on the way genetic variation maps onto phenotypic variation, an issue known as the representation problem. The genotype-phenotype map determines the variability of characters, which is the propensity to vary. Variability needs to be distinguished from variations, which are the actually realized differences between individuals. The genotype-phenotype map is the common theme underlying such varied biological phenomena as genetic canalization, developmental constraints, biological versatility, developmental dissociability, and morphological integration. For evolutionary biology the representation problem has important implications: how is it that extant species acquired a genotype-phenotype map which allows improvement by mutation and selection? Is the genotype-phenotype map able to change in evolution? What are the selective forces, if any, that shape the genotype-phenotype map? We propose that the genotype-phenotype map can evolve by two main routes: epistatic mutations, or the creation of new genes. A common result for organismic design is modularity. By modularity we mean a genotype-phenotype map in which there are few pleiotropic effects among characters serving different functions, with pleiotropic effects falling mainly among characters that are part of a single functional complex. Such a design is expected to improve evolvability by limiting the interference between the adaptation of different functions. Several population genetic models are reviewed that are intended to explain the evolutionary origin of a modular design. While our current knowledge is insufficient to assess the plausibility of these models, they form the beginning of a framework for understanding the evolution of the genotype-phenotype map.     

Astrobiology of life on Earth

Astrobiology is mistakenly regarded by some as a field confined to studies of life beyond Earth. Here, we consider life on Earth through an astrobiological lens. Whereas classical studies of microbiology historically focused on various anthropocentric sub-fields (such as fermented foods or commensals and pathogens of crop plants, livestock and humans), addressing key biological questions via astrobiological approaches can further our understanding of all life on Earth. We highlight potential implications of this approach through the articles in this Environmental Microbiology special issue ‘Ecophysiology of Extremophiles’. They report on the microbiology of places/processes including low-temperature environments and chemically diverse saline- and hypersaline habitats; aspects of sulphur metabolism in hypersaline lakes, dysoxic marine waters, and thermal acidic springs; biology of extremophile viruses; the survival of terrestrial extremophiles on the surface of Mars; biological soils crusts and rock-associated microbes of deserts; subsurface and deep biosphere, including a salticle formed within Triassic halite; and interactions of microbes with igneous and sedimentary rocks. These studies, some of which we highlight here, contribute to our understanding of the spatiotemporal reach of Earth'sfunctional biosphere, and the tenacity of terrestrial life. Their findings will help set the stage for future work focused on the constraints for life, and how organisms adapt and evolve to circumvent these constraints.     

Conceptualizing communities as natural entities: a philosophical argument with basic and applied implications

Recent work has suggested that conservation efforts such as restoration ecology and invasive species eradication are largely value-driven pursuits. Concurrently, changes to global climate are forcing ecologists to consider if and how collections of species will migrate, and whether or not we should be assisting such movements. Herein, we propose a philosophical framework which addresses these issues by utilizing ecological and evolutionary interrelationships to delineate individual ecological communities. Specifically, our Evolutionary Community Concept (ECC) recognizes unique collections of species that interact and have co-evolved in a given geographic area. We argue this concept has implications for a number of contemporary global conservation issues. Specifically, our framework allows us to establish a biological and science-driven context for making decisions regarding the restoration of systems and the removal of exotic species. The ECC also has implications for how we view shifts in species assemblages due to climate change and it advances our understanding of various ecological concepts, such as resilience.     

'Like all that lives': biology,medicine and bacteria in the age of Pasteur and Koch

This essay draws a new picture of the science of bacteria in its 'golden age', circa 1880-1900: the organization of its knowledge and practice, its germ theory of disease, the difference between its two major research traditions, and, above all, its place in life science in this period that bristled with theories and debates over inheritance, variation, selection, evolution and that witnessed the transition from natural history to laboratory biology. Pasteur and Koch's science acquired this biological dimension not despite being outside academic biology, nor despite the limitations of its applied, medical matrix, but rather because of that framework. The very practices of vaccine development constituted, at the same time, a new biological model of bacterial species and variation, which aligned them with other living things. Finally, the new picture reveals unsuspected continuity to later microbiology and molecular biology. In illuminating the self-perceptions of these sciences in relation to the past, it situates and opens a critical perspective on writings by bacteriologists such as Ludwik Fleck, Fran?ois Jacob and René Dubos, which have widely informed how we understand science.     

Mechanisms of bacterial morphogenesis: Evolutionary cell biology approaches provide new insights

How Darwin's “endless forms most beautiful” have evolved remains one of the most exciting questions in biology. The significant variety of bacterial shapes is most likely due to the specific advantages they confer with respect to the diverse environments they occupy. While our understanding of the mechanisms generating relatively simple shapes has improved tremendously in the last few years, the molecular mechanisms underlying the generation of complex shapes and the evolution of shape diversity are largely unknown. The emerging field of bacterial evolutionary cell biology provides a novel strategy to answer this question in a comparative phylogenetic framework. This relatively novel approach provides hypotheses and insights into cell biological mechanisms, such as morphogenesis, and their evolution that would have been difficult to obtain by studying only model organisms. We discuss the necessary steps, challenges, and impact of integrating “evolutionary thinking” into bacterial cell biology in the genomic era.     

Hamilton's rule meets the Hamiltonian: kin selection on dynamic characters

Many biological characters of interest are temporal sequences of decisions. The evolution of such characters is often modelled using dynamic optimization methods such as the maximum principle. A quantity central to these analyses is the ''Hamiltonian'' function, named after the mathematician William R. Hamilton. On the other hand, evolutionary models in which individuals interact with relatives are usually based on Hamilton''s rule, named after the evolutionary biologist William D. Hamilton. In this article we present a generalized maximum principle that includes the effects of interactions among relatives and we show that a time-dependent (dynamic) version of Hamilton''s rule holds involving the Hamiltonian. This result brings together the power and generality of both the maximum principle and Hamilton''s rule thereby providing a natural framework for understanding the evolution of ''dynamic'' characters under kin selection.     

植物与草食动物之间的协同适应及进化

通常协同进化是指一个物种 (或种群 )的遗传结构由于回应于另一个物种 (或种群 )遗传结构的变化而发生的相应改变。广义的理解 ,协同进化是相互作用的物种之间的互惠进化。生物之间、特别是植物与草食动物之间的协同适应与进化 ,已经成为生物进化、生态、遗传等学科十分关注的问题 ,可能成为生物学中各学科研究的交汇点或结点。作者具体阐述了 :(1)生物之间协同进化的研究意义 ,包括对生物学与生态学的价值 ;(2 )生物之间协同进化研究的限制或困难 ,诸如时间、研究对象、进化等级尺度和研究方法的限制 ;(3)植物与草食动物之间协同进化的主要研究对象 (系统 ) ,即昆虫传粉系统、昆虫诱导植物反应系统、种子散布系统、以及大型草食动物采食与植物反应系统 ;(4 )植物与草食动物之间协同进化的主要研究内容 ,包括适应特征 (性状 )——物种的可塑性 ,以及适应机制——物种适应过程与策略两个方面 ;(5 )植物与草食动物之间协同进化研究的存在问题及研究方向     

The best of both worlds- bringing together cell biology and infection at the Institut Pasteur

Only a profound understanding of the structure and function of cells - either as single units or in the context of tissues and whole organisms - will allow a comprehension of what happens in pathological conditions and provides the means to fight disease. The Cell Biology and Infection (BCI for Biologie Cellulaire et Infection) department was created in 2002 at the Institut Pasteur in Paris to develop a research program under the umbrella of cell biology, infection biology and microbiology. Its visionary ambition was to shape a common framework for cellular microbiology, and to interface the latter with hard sciences like physics and mathematics and cutting-edge technology. This concept, ahead of time, has given high visibility to the field of cellular microbiology and quantitative cell biology, and it has allowed the successful execution of highly interdisciplinary research programs linking a molecular understanding of cellular events with disease. Now, the BCI department embraces additional pathologies, namely cancer and neurodegenerative diseases. Here, we will portray how the integrative research approach of BCI has led to major scientific breakthroughs during the last ten years, and where we see scientific opportunities for the near future.     

Evolution and Conservation of Central African Biodiversity: Priorities for Future Research and Education in the Congo Basin and Gulf of Guinea

The tropical forests of the Congo Basin and Gulf of Guinea harbor some of the greatest terrestrial and aquatic biological diversity in the world. However, our knowledge of the rich biological diversity of this region and the evolutionary processes that have shaped it remains limited, as is our understanding of the capacity for species to adapt or otherwise respond to current and projected environmental change. In this regard, research efforts are needed to increase current scientific knowledge of this region's biodiversity, identify the drivers of past diversification, evaluate the potential for species to adapt to environmental change and identify key populations for future conservation. Moreover, when evolutionary research is combined with ongoing environmental monitoring efforts, it can also provide an important set of tools for assessing and mitigating the impacts of development activities. Building on a set of recommendations developed at an international workshop held in Gabon in 2011, we highlight major areas for future evolutionary research that could be directly tied to conservation priorities for the region. These research priorities are centered around five disciplinary themes: (1) documenting and discovering biodiversity; (2) identifying drivers of evolutionary diversification; (3) monitoring environmental change; (4) understanding community and ecosystem level processes; (5) investigating the ecology and epidemiology of disease from an evolutionary perspective (evolutionary epidemiology). Furthermore, we also provide an overview of the needs and priorities for biodiversity education and training in Central Africa.     

Science as a Way of Knowing--Evolutionary Biology

This essay is part of an educational project of the AmericanSociety of Zoologists that will make proposals for improvingthe first-year biology course inthe universities. The detailedsuggestions emphasize the importance of the conceptual frameworkof the biological sciences. The topic for this year is EvolutionaryBiology and it is developed largely by the hypothetico-deductivemethod emphasizing that science, in addition to its store ofinformation, is a way of knowing. Other topics will be consideredin future years in the ongoing project.     

How to study consciousness scientifically.

The neurosciences have advanced to the point that we can now treat consciousness as a scientific problem like any other. The problem is to explain how brain processes cause consciousness and how consciousness is realized in the brain. Progress is impeded by a number of philosophical mistakes, and the aim of this paper is to remove nine of those mistakes: (i) consciousness cannot be defined; (ii) consciousness is subjective but science is objective; (iii) brain processes cannot explain consciousness; (iv) the problem of ''qualia'' should be set aside; (v) consciousness is epiphenomenal; (vi) consciousness has no evolutionary function; (vii) a causal account of consciousness is necessarily dualistic; (viii) science is reductionistic, so a scientific account of consciousness would show it reducible to something else; and (ix) an account of consciousness must be an information processing account.