Detecting Heterogeneity of Substitution along DNA and Protein Sequences

Regions of differing constraint, mutation rate or recombination along a sequence of DNA or amino acids lead to a nonuniform distribution of polymorphism within species or fixed differences between species. The power of five tests to reject the null hypothesis of a uniform distribution is studied for four classes of alternate hypothesis. The tests explored are the variance of interval lengths; a modified variance test, which includes covariance between neighboring intervals; the length of the longest interval; the length of the shortest third-order interval; and a composite test. Although there is no uniformly most powerful test over the range of alternate hypotheses tested, the variance and modified variance tests usually have the highest power. Therefore, we recommend that one of these two tests be used to test departure from uniformity in all circumstances. Tables of critical values for the variance and modified variance tests are given. The critical values depend both on the number of events and the number of positions in the sequence. A computer program is available on request that calculates both the critical values for a specified number of events and number of positions as well as the significance level of a given data set.     

The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme.

An adaptationist programme has dominated evolutionary thought in England and the United States during the past 40 years. It is based on faith in the power of natural selection as an optimizing agent. It proceeds by breaking an oragnism into unitary 'traits' and proposing an adaptive story for each considered separately. Trade-offs among competing selective demands exert the only brake upon perfection; non-optimality is thereby rendered as a result of adaptation as well. We criticize this approach and attempt to reassert a competing notion (long popular in continental Europe) that organisms must be analysed as integrated wholes, with Baupl?ne so constrained by phyletic heritage, pathways of development and general architecture that the constraints themselves become more interesting and more important in delimiting pathways of change than the selective force that may mediate change when it occurs. We fault the adaptationist programme for its failure to distinguish current utility from reasons for origin (male tyrannosaurs may have used their diminutive front legs to titillate female partners, but this will not explain why they got so small); for its unwillingness to consider alternatives to adaptive stories; for its reliance upon plausibility alone as a criterion for accepting speculative tales; and for its failure to consider adequately such competing themes as random fixation of alleles, production of non-adaptive structures by developmental correlation with selected features (allometry, pleiotropy, material compensation, mechanically forced correlation), the separability of adaptation and selection, multiple adaptive peaks, and current utility as an epiphenomenon of non-adaptive structures. We support Darwin's own pluralistic approach to identifying the agents of evolutionary change.