LINKING BIG: THE CONTINUING PROMISE OF EVOLUTIONARY SYNTHESIS

Synthetic science promises an unparalleled ability to find new meaning in old data, extant results, or previously unconnected methods and concepts, but pursuing synthesis can be a difficult and risky endeavor. Our experience as biologists, informaticians, and educators at the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center has affirmed that synthesis can yield major insights, but also revealed that technological hurdles, prevailing academic culture, and general confusion about the nature of synthesis can hamper its progress. By presenting our view of what synthesis is, why it will continue to drive progress in evolutionary biology, and how to remove barriers to its progress, we provide a map to a future in which all scientists can engage productively in synthetic research.     

Evolutionary synthesis from a cosmopolitan point of view: a commentary on the ideas of Reif, Junker and Hossfeld

Summary The analysis of the Evolutionary Synthesis by Reif, Junker and Hossfeld (2000, Theory in Biosciences 119: 41–91) draws attention to language barriers that however important are far from impenetrable. The Synthesis is better viewed as a restoration than a revolution, and as something that occurred gradually, with no particular goal.     

Imidazopyridine-5,6,7,8-tetrahydro-8-quinolinamine derivatives with potent activity against HIV-1

Synthesis of several novel imidazopyridine-5,6,7,8-tetrahydro-8-quinolinamine derivatives with potent activity against HIV are described. Synthetic approaches allowing for variation of the substitution pattern are outlined and resulting changes in antiviral activity and pharmacokinetics are highlighted. Several compounds with low nanomolar anti-HIV activity and oral bioavailability are described.     

Synthetic biology

Synthetic biologists come in two broad classes. One uses unnatural molecules to reproduce emergent behaviours from natural biology, with the goal of creating artificial life. The other seeks interchangeable parts from natural biology to assemble into systems that function unnaturally. Either way, a synthetic goal forces scientists to cross uncharted ground to encounter and solve problems that are not easily encountered through analysis. This drives the emergence of new paradigms in ways that analysis cannot easily do. Synthetic biology has generated diagnostic tools that improve the care of patients with infectious diseases, as well as devices that oscillate, creep and play tic-tac-toe.     

Study on the synthesis and characterization of peptides containing phosphorylated tyrosine.

Phosphorylation and dephosphorylation are key events in receptor-mediated and post-receptor-mediated signal transduction. Synthetic phosphopeptides have been shown to have dramatic agonist or antagonist effects in several of these signaling pathways. For its 1997 study, the Association of Biomolecular Resource Facilities (ABRF) Peptide Synthesis Research Group assessed the ability of member laboratories to synthesize phosphotyrosine peptides. Participating laboratories were requested to synthesize and submit the following crude peptide, H-Glu-Asp-Tyr-Glu-Tyr(PO3H2)-Thr-Ala-Arg-Phe-NH2, for evaluation by amino acid analysis, sequence analysis, RP-HPLC, MALDI-TOF and ESI mass spectrometry. Prior to analysis of submitted peptides from ABRF members, the Peptide Synthesis Research Group synthesized and characterized the nonphosphorylated form of the peptide, the doubly phosphorylated form and the peptides singly phosphorylated on either the first or the second tyrosine. These peptide standards were separated easily by HPLC and capillary electrophoresis and the phosphotyrosine was detected readily by Edman degradation sequence analysis. No differences were seen by amino acid analysis and the expected masses were observed by mass spectrometry. The two singly phosphorylated peptides were easily distinguished by MALDI-PSD. Analysis of the peptides submitted from member facilities revealed that all but four of the 33 samples contained the correct product as determined by HPLC and mass spectrometry. HPLC analysis indicated that 20 of the 33 submitted samples contained greater than 75% correct product, five contained less than 50% correct product and four did not contain any correct product. By ESI/MS, an additional singly charged ion at m/z 535.5 was detected in five of the 33 submitted samples; this ion was subsequently shown to represent Ac-TARF-NH2. No correlation was found to exist between coupling time and percentage correct product; however, a correlation may exist between a greater percentage of correct product and the use of non-protected phosphotyrosine.     

一种用于构建表达载体的合成生物学数据库

由于基因测序及DNA合成技术与工具的突破性进展,生物工程正在加速发展,导致合成生物学的出现。本文介绍了一种用于构建表达载体的合成生物学数据库。阐述了如何利用MySQL数据库管理系统(DBMS)对合成生物学数据库gene_bank进行查询,并借助BioEdit软件对其中的多克隆位点(MCS)进行序列分析,通过查询与分析找出这一合成生物学数据库的特点。     

The rose and the name: the unresolved debate on biotechnological terms

The largest survey on the perception of synthetic biology-related disciplines (Porcar et al., 2019,EMBO Rep 20) recently revealed that the Spanish society does not have a very positive perception of the term synthetic biology. On the other hand, the terms biotechnology and even genetic engineering received relatively higher scores. The issue of nomenclature and perception is a classical one in science perception studies. Synthetic biologists have been debating their neologism (Synthetic Biology, from now on SB) for years. Even in a 2006 blog, Rob Carlson discussed the various labels for the new field, such as intentional biology, constructive biology, natural engineering, synthetic genomics and biological engineering. This diversity of names, along with the above mentioned negative public perception of the term synthetic biology, raises the question on whether the term itself is suitable or whether it could, in an extreme scenario, be replaced by another combining scientific consensus with public acceptance.     

The ten grand challenges of synthetic life

The construction of artificial life is one of the main scientific challenges of the Synthetic Biology era. Advances in DNA synthesis and a better understanding of regulatory processes make the goal of constructing the first artificial cell a realistic possibility. This would be both a fundamental scientific milestone and a starting point of a vast range of applications, from biofuel production to drug design. However, several major issues might hamper the objective of achieving an artificial cell. From the bottom-up to the selection-based strategies, this work encompasses the ten grand challenges synthetic biologists will have to be aware of in order to cope with the task of creating life in the lab.     

Pyrazolopyrimidines and pyrazolotriazines with potent activity against herpesviruses

Synthesis of several pyrazolo[1,5-c]pyrimidines, pyrazolo[1,5-a]pyrimidines and pyrazolo[1,5-a][1,3,5]triazines with potent activity against herpes simplex viruses is described. Synthetic approaches allowing for variation of the substitution pattern are outlined and resulting changes in antiviral activity are highlighted. Several compounds with in vitro antiviral activity similar or better than acyclovir are described.     

The Chemical Synthesis of DNA/RNA: Our Gift to Science

It is a great privilege to contribute to the Reflections essays. In my particular case, this essay has allowed me to weave some of my major scientific contributions into a tapestry held together by what I have learned from three colleagues (Robert Letsinger, Gobind Khorana, and George Rathmann) who molded my career at every important junction. To these individuals, I remain eternally grateful, as they always led by example and showed many of us how to break new ground in both science and biotechnology. Relative to my scientific career, I have focused primarily on two related areas. The first is methodologies we developed for chemically synthesizing DNA and RNA. Synthetic DNA and RNA continue to be an essential research tool for biologists, biochemists, and molecular biologists. The second is developing new approaches for solving important biological problems using synthetic DNA, RNA, and their analogs.     

Special focus: Synthetic biology

Special focus: Synthetic biology What is synthetic biology? SynBERC – The Synthetic Biology Engineering Research Center Ars Synthetica iGEM – The International Genetically Engineered Machine competition Some synthetic biology companies Paper watch: Synthetic biology Building blocks for novel functions Knowledge-making distinctions in synthetic biology Scaffold design and manufacturing: From concept to clinic Peptidomimetics – a versatile route to biologically active compounds Metabolic engineering of E. coli E. coli needs safety valves Systems-level metabolic engineering Mammalian synthetic biology Chemical aspects of synthetic biology Synthesis of DNA fragments in yeast Synthetic biology and patentable subject matter Patenting artificial life? Metabolic effects of synthetic rewiring Engineering for biofuels Regulatory elements for synthetic biology Book highlight Systems Biology and Synthetic Biology     

Hierarchy Theory of Evolution and the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis: Some Epistemic Bridges,Some Conceptual Rifts

Contemporary evolutionary biology comprises a plural landscape of multiple co-existent conceptual frameworks and strenuous voices that disagree on the nature and scope of evolutionary theory. Since the mid-eighties, some of these conceptual frameworks have denounced the ontologies of the Modern Synthesis and of the updated Standard Theory of Evolution as unfinished or even flawed. In this paper, we analyze and compare two of those conceptual frameworks, namely Niles Eldredge’s Hierarchy Theory of Evolution (with its extended ontology of evolutionary entities) and the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (with its proposal of an extended ontology of evolutionary processes), in an attempt to map some epistemic bridges (e.g. compatible views of causation; niche construction) and some conceptual rifts (e.g. extra-genetic inheritance; different perspectives on macroevolution; contrasting standpoints held in the “externalism–internalism” debate) that exist between them. This paper seeks to encourage theoretical, philosophical and historiographical discussions about pluralism or the possible unification of contemporary evolutionary biology.     

The Extended Synthesis: Something Old, Something New

The eclipse of Darwinism began to end in the 1980s and hangs in the balance today. We need an Extended Synthesis, using “extension” metaphorically. We must extend back in time to recover important aspects of Darwinism that were set aside, and then lost during neo-Darwinism, then move forward beyond neo-Darwinism to encompass new data and concepts. The most comprehensive framework for the Extended Synthesis is the Major Transitions in Evolution. The Extended Synthesis rests comfortably within a philosophical perspective in which biology does not need to be connected with other areas of science in order to justify itself. I am attracted to an older concept in which biology needs a covering law to connect it with the rest of the natural sciences. Darwin implicated a “higher law,” but did not specify it. If we can elucidate that law, the Extended Synthesis will become the Unified Theory of Biology called for by Brooks and Wiley 25 years ago.     

The high-throughput yeast deletion fitness data and the theories of dominance

The development of high-throughput fitness measurement methods provides unprecedented power to test evolutionary theories. However, with this comes new challenges regarding data quality and data analysis. We illustrate this by reanalysing the fitness distribution in several environments of yeast mutants (homo- and heterozygous) from the yeast deletion project. Originally created to study functional properties of genes, evolutionary biologists took advantage of this database to study evolutionary questions, such as dominance for fitness of mutations. We uncover several problems in this data set strongly affecting these questions that have remained unnoticed despite the numerous studies based on it. High-throughput methodologies are necessarily challenging, both experimentally and for data analysis: our point is not to criticize these approaches, but to pinpoint these challenges and to propose several improvements that may help avoid several shortcomings. Further, in the light of this finding, we question the conclusions regarding theories of dominance that have been made using this data set. We show that the data on deletion of small effects are not sufficiently reliable to be informative on this question. On the other hand, deletions of large effect exhibit no correlation between homo- and heterozygous fitness effects, a pattern that sheds new light on the h-s correlation issue, with several consequences for the debate over the different theories of dominance.     

On Reciprocal Causation in the Evolutionary Process

Recent calls for a revision of standard evolutionary theory (SET) are based partly on arguments about the reciprocal causation. Reciprocal causation means that cause–effect relationships are bi-directional, as a cause could later become an effect and vice versa. Such dynamic cause-effect relationships raise questions about the distinction between proximate and ultimate causes, as originally formulated by Ernst Mayr. They have also motivated some biologists and philosophers to argue for an Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES). The EES will supposedly expand the scope of the Modern Synthesis (MS) and SET, which has been characterized as gene-centred, relying primarily on natural selection and largely neglecting reciprocal causation. Here, I critically examine these claims, with a special focus on the last conjecture. I conclude that reciprocal causation has long been recognized as important by naturalists, ecologists and evolutionary biologists working in the in the MS tradition, although it it could be explored even further. Numerous empirical examples of reciprocal causation in the form of positive and negative feedback are now well known from both natural and laboratory systems. Reciprocal causation have also been explicitly incorporated in mathematical models of coevolutionary arms races, frequency-dependent selection, eco-evolutionary dynamics and sexual selection. Such dynamic feedback were already recognized by Richard Levins and Richard Lewontin in their bok The Dialectical Biologist. Reciprocal causation and dynamic feedback might also be one of the few contributions of dialectical thinking and Marxist philosophy in evolutionary theory. I discuss some promising empirical and analytical tools to study reciprocal causation and the implications for the EES. Finally, I briefly discuss how quantitative genetics can be adapated to studies of reciprocal causation, constructive inheritance and phenotypic plasticity and suggest that the flexibility of this approach might have been underestimated by critics of contemporary evolutionary biology.     

Phylogenetic supertrees: Assembling the trees of life

Systematists and comparative biologists commonly want to make statements about relationships among taxa that have never been collectively included in any single phylogenetic analysis. Construction of phylogenetic 'supertrees' provides one solution. Supertrees are estimates of phylogeny assembled from sets of smaller estimates (source trees) sharing some but not necessarily all their taxa in common. If certain conditions are met, supertrees can retain all or most of the information from the source trees and also make novel statements about relationships of taxa that do not co-occur on any one source tree. Supertrees have commonly been constructed using subjective and informal approaches, but several explicit approaches have recently been proposed.     

合成生物学技术的研究进展——DNA合成、组装与基因组编辑

合成生物学作为一门新兴学科,其目标主要有两点:一是利用非天然的分子使其出现生命的现象,也就是―人造生命‖;二是―改造生命‖,比如利用一种生命体的元件(或经过人工改造),组装到另一个生命体中,使其产生特定功能。无论是哪种目的,对生命遗传物质DNA的操作都非常关键,其具体包括DNA的从头合成、组装和编辑等。同时,这些使能技术的进步也促进了合成生物学其他领域的发展。本文介绍了DNA操作相关的合成生物学使能技术的最新进展。     

Heredity, development and evolution: the unmodern synthesis of E.S. Russell

In 1930, while R.A. Fisher, J.B.S. Haldane, E.B. Ford and S.G. Wright were laying the foundations of what a decade later J.S. Huxley dubbed “Modern Synthesis”, E.S. Russell published a groundbreaking work, The Interpretation of Development and Heredity. In this book Russell not only condemned Mendelian genetics and neo-Darwinism, but also proposed an alternative synthesis unifying heredity, development, and evolution. The book did not represent the work of a mind operating in isolation. Rather, it was a synthetic work connecting ideas and doctrines of many influential scientists working in Europe and the USA. Through the analysis of archival documents and rarely or never mentioned sources, this article provides an unconventional picture of Russell’s theoretical biology. It will be shown that Russell was an international celebrity; he was at the centre of a large network of scholars who shared his ideas and insights. He was one of several biologists arguing for a different synthesis; a synthesis perhaps less visible, less institutionalised, and less ‘modern’, nevertheless with its influential advocates and international support. Finally, this study shows that Russell’s synthesis was not rooted in the classic pantheon of towering figures in the history of biology, i.e. Darwin, Wallace, and Mendel, but was based on the teachings of Kant, Goethe, Cuvier, von Baer, and Müller.     

The excluded philosophy of evo-devo? Revisiting C.H. Waddington's failed attempt to embed Alfred North Whitehead's "organicism" in evolutionary biology

Though a prominent British developmental biologist in his day, a close friend of Theodosius Dobzhansky, and a frequent correspondent with Ernst Mayr, C.H. Waddington did not enter the ranks of "architect" of the Modern Synthesis. By the end of his career, in fact, he recognized that other biologists reacted to his work "as though they feel obscurely uneasy"; and that the best that some philosophers of biology could say of his work was that he was not "wholly orthodox" (Waddington 1975c, 11). In this essay, I take Waddington's self-assessments at face value and explore three potential reasons why his work did not have more of a direct impact: Waddington's explicit support for the philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead; a lack of institutional support; and Waddington's occasional marginalization from the core network of American neo-Darwinians. Though excluded from the Modern Synthesis in the mid-20th century, it now appears that Waddington's work does undergird the emerging evo-devo synthesis. Whether this indicates concomitant, if implicit, support for Whiteheadian philosophy is an interesting question not explored here.