Causal mechanisms of evolution and the capacity for niche construction

Ernst Mayr proposed a distinction between “proximate”, mechanistic, and “ultimate”, evolutionary, causes of biological phenomena. This dichotomy has influenced the thinking of many biologists, but it is increasingly perceived as impeding modern studies of evolutionary processes, including study of “niche construction” in which organisms alter their environments in ways supportive of their evolutionary success. Some still find value for this dichotomy in its separation of answers to “how?” versus “why?”questions about evolution. But “why is A?” questions about evolution necessarily take the form “how does A occur?”, so this separation is illusory. Moreover, the dichotomy distorts our view of evolutionary causality, in that, contra Mayr, the action of natural selection, driven by genotype-phenotype-environment interactions which constitute adaptations, is no less “proximate” than the biological mechanisms which are altered by naturally selected genetic variants. Mayr’s dichotomy thus needs replacement by more realistic, mechanistic views of evolution. From a mechanistic viewpoint, there is a continuum of adaptations from those evolving as responses to unchanging environmental pressures to those evolving as the capacity for niche construction, and intermediate stages of this can be identified. Some biologists postulate an association of “phenotypic plasticity” (phenotype-environment covariation with genotype held constant) with capacity for niche construction. Both “plasticity” and niche construction comprise wide ranges of adaptive mechanisms, often fully heritable and resulting from case-specific evolution. Association of “plasticity” with niche construction is most likely to arise in systems wherein capacity for complex learning and behavioral flexibility have already evolved.     

Causes,proximate and ultimate

Within evolutionary biology a distinction is frequently made between proximate and ultimate causes. One apparently plausible interpretation of this dichotomy is that proximate causes concern processes occurring during the life of an organism while ultimate causes refer to those processes (particularly natural selection) that shaped its genome. But ultimate causes are not sought through historical investigations of an organisms lineage. Rather, explanations referring to ultimate causes typically emerge from functional analyses. But these functional analyses do not identify causes of any kind, much less ultimate ones. So-called ultimate explanations are not about causes in any sense resembling those of proximate explanations. The attitude, implicit in the term ultimate cause, that these functional analyses are somehow superordinate to those involving proximate causes is unfounded. Ultimate causes are neither ultimate nor causes.     

Morphology and behaviour: functional links in development and evolution

Development and evolution of animal behaviour and morphology are frequently addressed independently, as reflected in the dichotomy of disciplines dedicated to their study distinguishing object of study (morphology versus behaviour) and perspective (ultimate versus proximate). Although traits are known to develop and evolve semi-independently, they are matched together in development and evolution to produce a unique functional phenotype. Here I highlight similarities shared by both traits, such as the decisive role played by the environment for their ontogeny. Considering the widespread developmental and functional entanglement between both traits, many cases of adaptive evolution are better understood when proximate and ultimate explanations are integrated. A field integrating these perspectives is evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo), which studies the developmental basis of phenotypic diversity. Ultimate aspects in evo-devo studies--which have mostly focused on morphological traits--could become more apparent when behaviour, 'the integrator of form and function', is integrated into the same framework of analysis. Integrating a trait such as behaviour at a different level in the biological hierarchy will help to better understand not only how behavioural diversity is produced, but also how levels are connected to produce functional phenotypes and how these evolve. A possible framework to accommodate and compare form and function at different levels of the biological hierarchy is outlined. At the end, some methodological issues are discussed.     

Social plasticity in fish: integrating mechanisms and function

Social plasticity is a ubiquitous feature of animal behaviour. Animals must adjust the expression of their social behaviour to the nuances of daily social life and to the transitions between life‐history stages, and the ability to do so affects their Darwinian fitness. Here, an integrative framework is proposed for understanding the proximate mechanisms and ultimate consequences of social plasticity. According to this framework, social plasticity is achieved by rewiring or by biochemically switching nodes of the neural network underlying social behaviour in response to perceived social information. Therefore, at the molecular level, it depends on the social regulation of gene expression, so that different brain genomic and epigenetic states correspond to different behavioural responses and the switches between states are orchestrated by signalling pathways that interface the social environment and the genotype. At the evolutionary scale, social plasticity can be seen as an adaptive trait that can be under positive selection when changes in the environment outpace the rate of genetic evolutionary change. In cases when social plasticity is too costly or incomplete, behavioural consistency can emerge by directional selection that recruits gene modules corresponding to favoured behavioural states in that environment. As a result of this integrative approach, how knowledge of the proximate mechanisms underlying social plasticity is crucial to understanding its costs, limits and evolutionary consequences is shown, thereby highlighting the fact that proximate mechanisms contribute to the dynamics of selection. The role of teleosts as a premier model to study social plasticity is also highlighted, given the diversity and plasticity that this group exhibits in terms of social behaviour. Finally, the proposed integrative framework to social plasticity also illustrates how reciprocal causation analysis of biological phenomena (i.e. considering the interaction between proximate factors and evolutionary explanations) can be a more useful approach than the traditional proximate–ultimate dichotomy, according to which evolutionary processes can be understood without knowledge on proximate causes, thereby black‐boxing developmental and physiological mechanisms.     

The levels of analysis revisited

The term levels of analysis has been used in several ways: to distinguish between ultimate and proximate levels, to categorize different kinds of research questions and to differentiate levels of reductionism. Because questions regarding ultimate function and proximate mechanisms are logically distinct, I suggest that distinguishing between these two levels is the best use of the term. Integrating across levels in research has potential risks, but many benefits. Consideration at one level can help generate novel hypotheses at the other, define categories of behaviour and set criteria that must be addressed. Taking an adaptationist stance thus strengthens research on proximate mechanisms. Similarly, it is critical for researchers studying adaptation and function to have detailed knowledge of proximate mechanisms that may constrain or modulate evolutionary processes. Despite the benefits of integrating across ultimate and proximate levels, failure to clearly identify levels of analysis, and whether or not hypotheses are exclusive alternatives, can create false debates. Such non-alternative hypotheses may occur between or within levels, and are not limited to integrative approaches. In this review, I survey different uses of the term levels of analysis and the benefits of integration, and highlight examples of false debate within and between levels. The best integrative biology reciprocally uses ultimate and proximate hypotheses to generate a more complete understanding of behaviour.     

By-product runaway evolution by adaptive mate choice: A behavioural aspect of sexual selection

Summary From a behavioural perspective on adaptive female choice, I developed a by-product runaway model of adaptive mate choice. The model illustrates the evolution of the tail size of peacocks. I consider the causal mechanisms of adaptive female choice: (1) why (ultimate reasons); (2) how (proximate mechanisms). Assumptions are developed based on these behavioural aspects. For (1) ultimate reasons, I assume that many male losers (low-fitness males) always occur due to genetic and environmental uncertainty (A-1). For (2) proximate mechanisms, I assume that losers tend to differ in the expression of a fitness-sensitive trait (an ultimate target, e.g. body size; A-2), that the fitness-sensitive trait correlates with a secondary sexual trait (a proximate cue, e.g. allometry in body size and tail size; (A-3), and that the cue trait has a genetic basis that is independent of the target trait (e.g. a genetic basis in tail ratio to body size; A-4). The model's results are: persistent female choice by means of a proximate cue (R-1); by-product selection on the independent genetic basis of the cue (R-2); and the non-adaptive or maladaptive runaway evolution of the male proximate cue (R-3). In this model, female mate preferences are non-arbitrary and adaptive, whereas the resulting evolution of male secondary sexual traits is non-adaptive in the sense of survival selection.     

Prediction of Higher Heating Value of Solid Biomass Fuels Using Artificial Intelligence Formalisms

The higher heating value (HHV) is an important property defining the energy content of biomass fuels. A number of proximate and/or ultimate analysis based predominantly linear correlations have been proposed for predicting the HHV of biomass fuels. A scrutiny of the relationships between the constituents of the proximate and ultimate analyses and the corresponding HHVs suggests that all relationships are not linear and thus nonlinear models may be more appropriate. Accordingly, a novel artificial intelligence (AI) formalism, namely genetic programming (GP) has been employed for the first time for developing two biomass HHV prediction models, respectively using the constituents of the proximate and ultimate analyses as the model inputs. The prediction and generalization performance of these models was compared rigorously with the corresponding multilayer perceptron (MLP) neural network based as also currently available high-performing linear and nonlinear HHV models. This comparison reveals that the HHV prediction performance of the GP and MLP models is consistently better than that of their existing linear and/or nonlinear counterparts. Specifically, the GP- and MLP-based models exhibit an excellent overall prediction accuracy and generalization performance with high (>0.95) magnitudes of the coefficient of correlation and low (<4.5 %) magnitudes of mean absolute percentage error in respect of the experimental and model-predicted HHVs. It is also found that the proximate analysis-based GP model has outperformed all the existing high-performing linear biomass HHV prediction models. In the case of ultimate analysis-based HHV models, the MLP model has exhibited best prediction accuracy and generalization performance when compared with the existing linear and nonlinear models. The AI-based models introduced in this paper due to their excellent performance have the potential to replace the existing biomass HHV prediction models.     

On the combined analysis of proximate and ultimate aspects in diel vertical migration (DVM) research

Although evolutionary ecologists agree that proximate and ultimate aspects are two sides of one coin, they are seldom interested in studies on physiological and behavioural mechanisms at the base of ecological phenomena. Nevertheless, these mechanisms are objects of selection and evolved to realise adaptive significances. This paper is a plea to bring both fields closer together, and, by means of an example of Diel Vertical Migration of Daphnia, some proximate and ultimate aspects are discussed. It is argued that light changes, not fish kairomone, is the primary cause for an individual to swim downwards at dawn and upwards at dusk. However, what is called a causal factor might differ when ecosystems or individuals are studied. In addition, causality in ecology is not simple, and has the character of a `set of necessary conditions'. To illustrate the importance of proximate analyses in DVM, two basic response mechanisms are discussed: Photobehaviour system 1 and 2. The physiological character of these systems leads to a fixed type of migration or to a phenotypically induced DVM, respectively. The adaptive significance of the first might be a reduction of the hazardous effects of UV radiation and of the second a lowering of mortality due to visually hunting predators.     

Ultimate explanations concern the adaptive rationale for organism design

My understanding is that proximate explanations concern adaptive mechanism and that ultimate explanations concern adaptive rationale. Viewed in this light, the two kinds of explanation are quite distinct, but they interact in a complementary way to give a full understanding of biological adaptations. In contrast, Laland et al. (2013)—following a literal reading of Mayr (Science 134:1501–1506, 1961)—have characterized ultimate explanations as concerning any and all mechanisms that have operated over the course of an organism’s evolutionary history. This has unfortunate consequences, such as allowing random drift to form the basis for ultimate explanations, and allowing proximate and ultimate explanations to bleed into each other until their distinction is meaningless. Here, I suggest Laland et al’s explanatory framework of “reciprocal causation” is not conducive to successful biological science, and that they have misunderstood key elements of the theory of Darwinian adaptation.     

Reciprocal causation and the proximate–ultimate distinction

Laland and colleagues have sought to challenge the proximate–ultimate distinction claiming that it imposes a unidirectional model of causation, is limited in its capacity to account for complex biological phenomena, and hinders progress in biology. In this article the core of their argument is critically analyzed. It is claimed that contrary to their claims Laland et al. rely upon the proximate–ultimate distinction to make their points and that their alternative conception of reciprocal causation refers to phenomena that were already accounted for by standard theory.     

Dual Causality and the Autonomy of Biology

Ernst Mayr’s concept of dual causality in biology with the two forms of causes (proximate and ultimate) continues to provide an essential foundation for the philosophy of biology. They are equivalent to functional (=proximate) and evolutionary (=ultimate) causes with both required for full biological explanations. The natural sciences can be classified into nomological, historical nomological and historical dual causality, the last including only biology. Because evolutionary causality is unique to biology and must be included for all complete biological explanations, biology is autonomous from the physical sciences.     

Gregariousness does not vary with geography,developmental stage,or group relatedness in feeding redheaded pine sawfly larvae

Aggregations are widespread across the animal kingdom, yet the underlying proximate and ultimate causes are still largely unknown. An ideal system to investigate this simple, social behavior is the pine sawfly genus Neodiprion, which is experimentally tractable and exhibits interspecific variation in larval gregariousness. To assess intraspecific variation in this trait, we characterized aggregative tendency within a single widespread species, the redheaded pine sawfly (N. lecontei). To do so, we developed a quantitative assay in which we measured interindividual distances over a 90‐min video. This assay revealed minimal behavioral differences: (1) between early‐feeding and late‐feeding larval instars, (2) among larvae derived from different latitudes, and (3) between groups composed of kin and those composed of nonkin. Together, these results suggest that, during the larval feeding period, the benefits individuals derive from aggregating outweigh the costs and that this cost‐to‐benefit ratio does not vary dramatically across space (geography) or ontogeny (developmental stage). In contrast to the feeding larvae, our assay revealed a striking reduction in gregariousness following the final larval molt in N. lecontei. We also found some intriguing interspecific variation: While N. lecontei and N. maurus feeding larvae exhibit significant aggregative tendencies, feeding N. compar larvae do not aggregate at all. These results set the stage for future work investigating the proximate and ultimate mechanisms underlying developmental and interspecific variation in larval gregariousness across Neodiprion.     

Sexual Strategy and Size Dimorphism in Rattlesnakes: Integrating Proximate and Ultimate Causation

SYNOPSIS. Integrating proximate and ultimate causes and effectssimultaneously in the study of behavior is challenging and complex,but useful. This is equivalent to asking both "How?" (in thesense of proximate mechanisms) and "Why?" (in the sense of ultimateevolutionary payoffs) an organism operates in one way and notanother. Sex differences in rattlesnake (i) size and growthand (ii) mating and reproductive strategies and tactics, providea good theoretical and empirical context in which to attemptsuch integration. We employ interdisciplinary and multidisciplinaryapproaches in our behavioral and physiological work, but wemean something different by "integrative," that amounts to thesimultaneous study of both proximate and ultimate levels ofcausation and explanation. Though not always feasible, thisapproach represents an important goal to work towards becauseit attempts to represent faithfully the complexity inherentin living systems. To this end, we also employ a variety ofmodeling approaches, which entrain intuition, generate new hypotheses,and sharpen inference. Individual-based simulations, for example,offer promise for broad, integrative programs of biologicalresearch.     

Switching on plant genes by external chemical signals

During the past decade there has been rapidly increasing interest in the role of plant volatiles in insect-plant interactions and the induction of plant defence systems by both pathogens and herbivores. Scientists are striving to link the proximate studies elucidating pathways and genes with the ultimate adaptive studies that attempt to explain their ecological role. However, we still do not know whether plants 'talk' to one another by employing 'phytopheromones'.     

Morphology ofCoptis japonica and its meaning in phylogeny

In the genusCoptis, some interesting features are found which are considered important phylogenetically. The median bundles of petiole and petiolule, and the midrib of lamina are double. They seem to represent a transitional situation between a dichotomy and a single median bundle found in usual angiospermous venation. The double bundle is either derived from 2 independent leaf trace bundles or formed by dichotomy of a leaf trace bundle, and it does not seem so important whether the number of trace bundles is even or odd. The nodal structure is trilacunar or pentalacunar with 3, 4, 6 or 8 trace bundles. The upper part of the carpel does not produce ovules and is open from the initiation of the carpel. It is suggested that the carpel becomes open secondarily concomitant with the reduction of ovules. This shows that the closure of the carpel is not perfectly established.     

How do you measure pleasure? A discussion about intrinsic costs and benefits in primate allogrooming

Social grooming is an important element of social life in terrestrial primates, inducing the putative benefits of β-endorphin stimulation and group harmony and cohesion. Implicit in many analyses of grooming (e.g. biological markets) are the assumptions of costs and benefits to grooming behaviour. Here, in a review of literature, we investigate the proximate costs and benefits of grooming, as a potentially useful explanatory substrate to the well-documented ultimate (functional) explanations. We find that the hedonic benefits of grooming are well documented. However, we did not find convincing evidence for costs. If proximate costs do exist, they might consist of energetic, cognitive, opportunity costs, or some combination of all of these. Nonetheless, there remains the possibility that grooming costs are negligible, or even that the provision of allogrooming is rewarding in itself. We suggest empirical research to resolve this issue.     

Proximate and ultimate causes: how come? and what for?

Proximate and ultimate causes in evolutionary biology have come to conflate two distinctions. The first is a distinction between immediate and historical causes. The second is between explanations of mechanism and adaptive function. Mayr emphasized the first distinction but many evolutionary biologists use proximate and ultimate causes to refer to the second. I recommend that ‘ultimate cause’ be abandoned as ambiguous.     

The dispersion of Echinococcus granulosus in the intestine of dogs

We studied the dispersion of adult Echinococcus granulosus in the intestine of experimentally infected dogs at 2 scales of habitat use. On a coarse scale, worms were found most frequently in the anterior third of the small intestine. On a fine scale, clumps or aggregations, typically of 4-5 worms in an area of 12 mm2, occurred throughout the anterior two-thirds of the intestine. The most likely proximate cause of aggregative behavior is attraction between individual worms. There are at least 2 equally plausible ultimate causes of the behavior: to enhance cross-fertilization and to improve the quality of the environment. Restriction of worms to the anterior small intestine may be a consequence of aggregative behavior on a finer scale or a response to different proximate and ultimate factors.     

Immune function across generations: integrating mechanism and evolutionary process in maternal antibody transmission

The past 30 years of immunological research have revealed much about the proximate mechanisms of maternal antibody transmission and utilization, but have not adequately addressed how these issues are related to evolutionary and ecological theory. Much remains to be learned about individual differences within a species in maternal antibody transmission as well as differences among species in transmission or utilization of antibodies. Similarly, maternal-effects theory has generally neglected the mechanisms by which mothers influence offspring phenotype. Although the environmental cues that generate maternal effects and the consequent effects for offspring phenotype are often well characterized, the intermediary physiological and developmental steps through which the maternal effect is transmitted are generally unknown. Integration of the proximate mechanisms of maternal antibody transmission with evolutionary theory on maternal effects affords an important opportunity to unite mechanism and process by focusing on the links between genetics, environment and physiology, with the ultimate goal of explaining differences among individuals and species in the transfer of immune function from one generation to the next.