What We Do Not Know About Differentiation

The outstanding recent advances in the analysis of differentiationare in concept and method. In this paper examples are providedto demonstrate that formulation of the problem of differentiationin terms of biosynthesis and its control poses questions innew and more manageable ways. As examples, reference will bemade to: (1) the question of control of the sets of specializedproperties by which we define a cell type; (2) propagabilityof differentiated states; (3) developmental bias in relationto intracellular events; and (4) the mechanisms of extrinsiccontrol of differentiation. Particular attention, also, willbe focused on the relationship of morphogenetic to biosyntheticevents.     

Germination of Spores of Bacillus Species: What We Know and Do Not Know

Spores of Bacillus species can remain in their dormant and resistant states for years, but exposure to agents such as specific nutrients can cause spores'' return to life within minutes in the process of germination. This process requires a number of spore-specific proteins, most of which are in or associated with the inner spore membrane (IM). These proteins include the (i) germinant receptors (GRs) that respond to nutrient germinants, (ii) GerD protein, which is essential for GR-dependent germination, (iii) SpoVA proteins that form a channel in spores'' IM through which the spore core''s huge depot of dipicolinic acid is released during germination, and (iv) cortex-lytic enzymes (CLEs) that degrade the large peptidoglycan cortex layer, allowing the spore core to take up much water and swell, thus completing spore germination. While much has been learned about nutrient germination, major questions remain unanswered, including the following. (i) How do nutrient germinants penetrate through spores'' outer layers to access GRs in the IM? (ii) What happens during the highly variable and often long lag period between the exposure of spores to nutrient germinants and the commitment of spores to germinate? (iii) What do GRs and GerD do, and how do these proteins interact? (iv) What is the structure of the SpoVA channel in spores'' IM, and how is this channel gated? (v) What is the precise state of the spore IM, which has a number of novel properties even though its lipid composition is very similar to that of growing cells? (vi) How is CLE activity regulated such that these enzymes act only when germination has been initiated? (vii) And finally, how does the germination of spores of clostridia compare with that of spores of bacilli?     

Homology: Why We Know a Whale Is Not a Fish

Homology is a fundamental concept in comparative and evolutionary biology and yet often the focus of antievolution challenges. In describing structural similarity that is the result of common ancestry, hypotheses about homology require rigorous testing and form the basis for making predictions about anatomy and physiology as well as the fossil record. Communicating the basics of homology to students is essential for a high school biology curriculum.     

We Know in Part: James McCosh on Evolution and Christian Faith

James McCosh (1811–1894), president of Princeton College from 1868 to 1888, played a significant role in the American reception of evolution in the late 1800s – he was one of the more prominent clergyman to assuage the public’s fears of evolution while incorporating evolution into a conservative Christian worldview. McCosh was a prolific writer, whose books document his intellectual journey from hostility to acceptance of evolution. Three things will stand out in this overview that have not been emphasized in detail in other works: (1) James McCosh’s perspective on evolution dramatically changed over time; (2) McCosh’s motivations for engaging in the evolution-religion debate serve to clear up confusion regarding McCosh’s final position on evolution; and (3) the theological and philosophical basis for McCosh’s acceptance of evolution was established while McCosh was still hostile to evolution. His theological background therefore ‘pre-adapted’ him for evolution, and he was able to preach theology and evolution without substantially altering his theology.     

The Macroevolution of our Ancient Lineage: What We Know (or Think We Know) about Early Hominin Diversity

Quantitative, evolutionary models that incorporate within- and between-species variation are critical for interpreting the fossil record of human diversity, and for making taxonomic distinctions. However, small sample sizes, sexual dimorphism, temporal trends, geographic variation, and the limited number of relevant extant models have always made the consideration of variation difficult for paleoanthropologists. Here we provide a brief overview of current early hominin diversity. We then argue that for many species our limited understanding of within species variation hampers our ability to make taxonomic decisions with any level of statistical certainty. Perhaps more significantly, the underlying causes of between-species variation among early hominins are poorly studied. There have been few attempts to correlate aspects of the phenotype with meaningful evidence for niche differentiation, to demonstrate the selective advantage of traits, or to provide other evidence for macroevolutionary divergence. Moreover, current depictions of vast pattern (but not size) diversity are inconsistent with expectations derived from most other extant primate clades that have adaptively radiated. If indeed the early hominin record is highly speciose, the reasons for this remain unclear.     

Human Evolution through Developmental Change.

Human Evolution through Developmental Change. Nancy Minugh-Purvis and Kenneth J. McNamara. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002. 508 pp.     

What We Think We Know vs. What We Need to Know About Orchid Pollination and Conservation: <Emphasis Type="Italic">Cypripedium</Emphasis> L. as a Model Lineage

While Darwin (1862, 1877) showed that reproductive success in orchid populations depended on adaptive floral morphology coupled with pollinator visitation a more recent review of the literature (Tremblay et al., 2005) confirmed that many out-breeding species are pollinator-limited because most orchid species showing low fecundity also lack rewards. The absence of rewards depresses both pollinator fidelity and the frequency of pollinator visits to an orchid population even though orchid flowers that lack rewards retain the same interlocking floral structures for precise pollinia removal and deposition found in related species that offer rewards. Using the genus, Cypripedium, as a model lineage of non-rewarding flowers this study also shows that the correlation between low fruit set in a Cypripedium sp. and its specific pollinator(s) is insufficient to predict specific frequencies of low fecundity. Annual rates of fruit set often vary broadly between populations of the same species and within the same population over several seasons. We speculate that fruit-set rates also decline when orchid demography and additional biotic and abiotic factors interrupt rates of pollinator activity (pre-zygotic) and fertilization/fruit maturation (post-zygotic). We suggest that that traditional field studies on pollination ecology and breeding systems be combined with data sets recording genetic variation and orchid flower demography in relation to seasonal variation in climate. We also propose that the same information be collected in regard to genetic variation, demography and phenology of populations of known orchid pollinators and co-blooming angiosperm species native to orchid habitats.     

Long-Term Green Tea Supplementation Does Not Change the Human Gut Microbiota

BackgroundGreen tea catechins may play a role in body weight regulation through interactions with the gut microbiota.AimWe examined whether green tea supplementation for 12 weeks induces changes in composition of the human gut microbiota.Methods58 Caucasian men and women were included in a randomized, placebo-controlled design. For 12 weeks, subjects consumed either green tea (>0.56 g/d epigallocatechin-gallate + 0.28 ∼ 0.45 g/d caffeine) or placebo capsules. Fecal samples were collected twice (baseline, vs. week 12) for analyses of total bacterial profiles by means of IS-profiling, a 16S-23S interspacer region-based profiling method.ResultsNo significant changes between baseline and week 12 in subjects receiving green tea or placebo capsules, and no significant interactions between treatment (green tea or placebo) and time (baseline and week 12) were observed for body composition. Analysis of the fecal samples in subjects receiving green tea and placebo showed similar bacterial diversity and community structures, indicating there were no significant changes in bacterial diversity between baseline and week 12 in subjects receiving green tea capsules or in subjects receiving placebo capsules. No significant interactions were observed between treatment (green tea or placebo) and time (baseline and week 12) for the gut microbial diversity. Although, there were no significant differences between normal weight and overweight subjects in response to green tea, we did observe a reduced bacterial alpha diversity in overweight as compared to normal weight subjects (p = 0.002).ConclusionGreen tea supplementation for 12 weeks did not have a significant effect on composition of the gut microbiota.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01556321","term_id":"NCT01556321"}}NCT01556321     

The Origin and Evolution of Cultures; Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution

The Origin and Evolution of Cultures. Robert Boyd and Peter J. Richerson. New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. 456 pp.
Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution. Peter J. Richerson and Robert Boyd. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005. 332 pp.