The extended replicator

This paper evaluates and criticises the developmental systems conception of evolution and develops instead an extension of the gene's eye conception of evolution. We argue (i) Dawkin's attempt to segregate developmental and evolutionary issues about genes is unsatisfactory. On plausible views of development it is arbitrary to single out genes as the units of selection. (ii) The genotype does not carry information about the phenotype in any way that distinguishes the role of the genes in development from that other factors. (iii) There is no simple and general causal criterion which distinguishes the role of genes in development and evolution. (iv) There is, however, an important sense in which genes but not every other developmental factor represent the phenotype. (v) The idea that genes represent features of the phenotype forces us to recognise that genes are not the only, or almost the only, replicators. Many mechanisms of replication are involved in both development and evolution. (vi) A conception of evolutionary history which recognises both genetic and non-genetic replicators, lineages of replicators and interactors has advantages over both the radical rejection of the replicator/interactor distinction and the conservative restriction of replication to genetic replication.     

August Weismann on Germ-Plasm Variation

August Weismann is famous for having argued against the inheritance of acquired characters. However, an analysis of his work indicates that Weismann always held that changes in external conditions, acting during development, were the necessary causes of variation in the hereditary material. For much of his career he held that acquired germ-plasm variation was inherited. An irony, which is in tension with much of the standard twentieth-century history of biology, thus exists – Weismann was not a Weismannian. I distinguish three claims regarding the germ-plasm: (1) its continuity,(2) its morphological sequestration, and (3) its variational sequestration. With respect to changes in Weismann's views on the cause of variation, I divide his career into four stages. For each stage I analyze his beliefs on the relative importance of changes in external conditions and sexual reproduction as causes ofvariation in the hereditary material. Weismann believed, and Weismannism denies, that variation, heredity, and development were deeply intertwined processes. This article is part of a larger project comparing commitments regarding variation during the latter half of the nineteenth century. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

The Role of Neurotransmitters and Proteins in the Genetic-Functional Organization of the Animal Brain

It was shown that animals that differ in behavioral characteristics (August and Wistar rats) also differ in neurotransmitter and protein metabolism, which can be considered as tests that adequately reflect the functional condition of the central nervous system. These differences are expressed at the level of both subcortical structures (the hippocampus and caudate nucleus) and various morphofunctional types of the sensorimotor cortex neurons (layers III and V). Studies on genetically different animals strains have revealed metabolic features that allow the determination of individual behavioral features and an estimation of individual brain structures in these processes.     

Small RNA shuffling between murine sperm and their cytoplasmic droplets during epididymal maturation

1. Download : Download high-res image (221KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image

     

Sex, Death, and Evolution in Proto- and Metazoa, 1876–1913

In the period 1875–1920, a debate about the generality and applicability of evolutionary theory to all organisms was motivated by work on unicellular ciliates like Paramecium because of their peculiar nuclear dualism and life cycles. The French cytologist Emile Maupas and the German zoologist August Weismann argued in the 1880s about the evolutionary origins and functions of sex (which in the ciliates is not linked to reproduction), and death (which appeared to be the inevitable fate of lineages denied sexual conjugation), an argument rooted in the question of whether the ciliates and their processes where homologous to other cellular organisms. In the beginning of the twentieth century, this question of homology came to be less important as the ciliates were used by the British protozoologist Clifford Dobell and the American zoologist Herbert Spencer Jennings to study evolutionary processes in general rather than problems of development and cytology. For them, homology mattered less than analogy. This story illustrates two partially distinct problems in evolutionary biology: first, the question of whether all living things have common features and origins; and second, whether their history and current nature can be described by identical mechanisms. Where Maupas (contra Weismann) made the ciliates qualitatively the same as all other organisms in order to create a cohesive evolutionary theory for biology, Jennings and Dobell made them qualitatively different in order to achieve the same end. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Weismann Rules! OK? Epigenetics and the Lamarckian temptation

August Weismann rejected the inheritance of acquired characters on the grounds that changes to the soma cannot produce the kind of changes to the germ-plasm that would result in the altered character being transmitted to subsequent generations. His intended distinction, between germ-plasm and soma, was closer to the modern distinction between genotype and phenotype than to the modern distinction between germ cells and somatic cells. Recently, systems of epigenetic inheritance have been claimed to make possible the inheritance of acquired characters. I argue that the sense in which these claims are true does not challenge fundamental tenets of neo-Darwinism. Epigenetic inheritance expands the range of options available to genes but evolutionary adaptation remains the product of natural selection of ‘random’ variation.     

Freud’s Lamarckism’ and the Politics of Racial Science

This article re-contextualizes Sigmund Freud’s interest in the idea of the inheritance of acquired characteristics in terms of the socio-political connotations of Lamarckism and Darwinism in the 1930s and 1950s. Many scholars have speculated as to why Freud continued to insist on a supposedly outmoded theory of evolution in the 1930s even as he was aware that it was no longer tenable. While Freud’s initial interest in the inheritance of phylogenetic memory was not necessarily politically motivated, his refusal to abandon this theory in the 1930s must be understood in terms of wider debates, especially regarding the position of the Jewish people in Germany and Austria. Freud became uneasy about the inheritance of memory not because it was scientifically disproven, but because it had become politically charged and suspiciously regarded by the Nazis as Bolshevik and Jewish. Where Freud seemed to use the idea of inherited memory as a way of universalizing his theory beyond the individual cultural milieu of his mostly Jewish patients, such a notion of universal science itself became politically charged and identified as particularly Jewish. The vexed and speculative interpretations of Freud’s Lamarckism are situated as part of a larger post-War cultural reaction against Communism on the one hand (particularly in the 1950s when Lamarckism was associated with the failures of Lysenko), and on the other hand, against any scientific concepts of race in the wake of World War II.     

Bacteriocyte-like cells harbour Wolbachia in the ovary of Drosophila melanogaster (Insecta, Diptera) and Zyginidia pullula (Insecta, Hemiptera)

Wolbachia is the most widespread bacterial endosymbiont in insects. It is responsible for a variety of reproductive alterations of the hosts. Wolbachia is transmitted through the germline from mother to offspring and, in rare cases, between individuals. This implies that acquired properties (through symbiosis with Wolbachia) can become heritable. We investigated the transovarial inheritance of Wolbachia in two phylogenetically distant insects, Drosophila melanogaster and Zyginidia pullula. We detected in both systems bacteriocyte-like cells, densely packed with Wolbachia endosymbionts, at the tip of the ovarioles. Bacteriocytes are cells specialized to harbour bacteria, typical of mutualistic insect symbiosis. Our observations of bacteriocyte-like cells harbouring Wolbachia in the ovary emphasize the plasticity of the female reproductive system of insects, which maintains its function while some cells are densely colonized by bacteria. In summary, there is evidence from different insects that bacteria which behave as parasites of reproduction are harboured by cells resembling bacteriocytes, which appear to mediate transmission of the bacteria to the progeny. It seems a valid hypothesis that the bacteriocyte-like cells that we observed are not the result of a co-evolution of host and symbiont, considering that Wolbachia is not an obligatory symbiont in Drosophila and Zyginidia.