Pigliucci argues that there is no, and will be no paradigm shift regarding the modern synthesis. He states that current evolutionary theory should shift to form (plasticity, epigentic inheritance) instead of a focus on genetic theory.
He goes on to propose as Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES), and how he expects it to come to fruition and become fairly expected over the next decade or so.
The modern synthesis is lacking, in terms of not including anything on form, as well as developmental biology, which wasn't include in 'evolutionary theory' until 1977 (Gould) in a paper called Ontogeny and Phylogeny. Followed by the Evo-Devo thing in the 1990's.
PLASTICITY
In terms of plasticity; there is no longer just the topic of 'heritability' in its basic form. There is an enormous dependence on genotype-interactions (these can be studied/investigated by looking at the reactions norm that Simon was talking about) - plasticity exists in almost every species that it has been investigated for. Pigliucci also says, like Simon also showed today, that plasticity can lean towards evolutionary change, preceding genetic change itself.
EPIGENETICS
Pigluicci states that epigenetics is not a contradiction to genetic inheritance (and so the Modern Synthesis) but instead is an extremely complex extension of the field.
COMPLEXITY THEORY
He uses this term to highlight the idea that natural selection may not be the only 'organizing principal' available to explain the complexity of biological systems. Natural selection would not be ignored or thought of as a secondary role, just interact with the theory of form.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00246.x/pdf
Thursday, 28 November 2013
What we are to do. Our official topic title and questions we should aim to understand and discuss by reading around our topic
Official title of our topic is:
Natural variation and knock-out techniques as probes of Darwinian fitness (incorporating Noble's review of the link between physiology and genetics).
Question 1. What are the proposals of Noble's review of the link between physiology and genetics?
Question 2. Considering Denis Noble; what are the applications and limitations of genetic knock-out experiments as probes of Darwinian fitness?
Question 3. Considering Denis Noble; what are the applications and limitations of experimental manipulations of natural variation as probes of Darwinian fitness?
Aim to read at least 1 paper about both genetic knock-outs and experimental manipulations applications/limitations.
Natural variation and knock-out techniques as probes of Darwinian fitness (incorporating Noble's review of the link between physiology and genetics).
Question 1. What are the proposals of Noble's review of the link between physiology and genetics?
Question 2. Considering Denis Noble; what are the applications and limitations of genetic knock-out experiments as probes of Darwinian fitness?
Question 3. Considering Denis Noble; what are the applications and limitations of experimental manipulations of natural variation as probes of Darwinian fitness?
Aim to read at least 1 paper about both genetic knock-outs and experimental manipulations applications/limitations.
HUMMINGBIRDS
It is established that
genome, nucleus and red blood cell size are all correlated in
vertebrates. Since larger cells have lower surface area to volume
ratios, they are less efficient at gas exchange; which means that
high metabolisms are constrained to small cells, which must therefore
have small genomes. Powered flight is metabolically expensive, so
birds are predicted to have smaller average genomes compared to all
other vertebrates. Saurischian dinosaurs underwent a genome reduction
before they evolved powered flight and gave rise to birds; within
birds genome size tends to be smaller with increasing flying ability.
This study compares 37
species of hummingbirds in terms of nucleus, red blood cell and
genome size, as well as other physiological parameters such as
cardiac mass, haemoglobin concentration, body mass, wing loading and
elevation, taking phylogeny into account. Genome size of hummingbirds
was found to be constrained similarly to other vertebrates. Genome
size across hummingbird species was found to have low variation and
did not correlate with body size, but was positively correlated with
heart size. The results generated two important questions which could
be extrapolated to other groups; 1) is genome size a derived or
ancestral feature? and 2) why do some species within a clade have
larger genomes?
Hummingbirds diverged
from nightjars; a group which have larger genome sizes than
hummingbirds, so genome reduction must have occurred after this
divergence and is therefore not an ancestral feature. Hummingbird
species with the largest genomes were all from the upper tropical
zone in 900-1600 m humid evergreen forests; these species are not
close relatives, so the secondary change in genome size (the primary
change being the reduction following divergence from nightjars) makes
the relationship between phylogeny and genome size not as clear as
the relationship between environment and genome size. Thus this study
provides a strong example of evolution influenced by interactions
between the genome and the environment.
Wednesday, 20 November 2013
HO, BURGGREN, & Interactions between the epigenome and the genome
I think this will be a useful paper
"Epigenetics and transgenerational transfer: a physiological perspective"- (Ho & Burggren, 2010)
Here is the link: http://jeb.biologists.org/content/213/1/3.full
I will go through it fully and summarise next week, unless anybody wants to beat me to it or read themselves!
This figure could be a good topic for discussion.
"Epigenetics and transgenerational transfer: a physiological perspective"- (Ho & Burggren, 2010)
Here is the link: http://jeb.biologists.org/content/213/1/3.full
I will go through it fully and summarise next week, unless anybody wants to beat me to it or read themselves!
This figure could be a good topic for discussion.
Maternal Effects
Definition of Maternal Effects: a non-genetic influence on the offspring phenotype,
based on the environmental conditions experienced by the mother organism. Maternal effects are a type of epigenetic effect.
Mechanisms:
----Through variations in resource/energy allocation
----Oviposition site (where the mother releases her progeny has an effect on its life history eg. next to food = better, next to other offspring = worse as they are competitors for resources)
----Hormones (hormone levels during oogeneis affect embryo)
Mechanisms:
----Through variations in resource/energy allocation
----Oviposition site (where the mother releases her progeny has an effect on its life history eg. next to food = better, next to other offspring = worse as they are competitors for resources)
----Hormones (hormone levels during oogeneis affect embryo)
(Fowler, 2005): Looked at aphids (greenflies) - found that under a certain predator-induced stress cue, the mothers produced winged offspring. This gave them advantage with dispersibility and fitness through escaping the predator.
----->> mother experience (predator cue) -------->> changes offspring phenotype
this is relevant to evolution because it influences the dispersibility, gives it a competitive advantage (can get resources easier due to wings) (also can escape predator) - therefore affect other populations through out-competing other species or organism. Also, affect food availability to the predator.... if all offspring are winged and fly away then new food source?
This phenotypic change influences population dynamics and evolution.
----->> mother experience (predator cue) -------->> changes offspring phenotype
this is relevant to evolution because it influences the dispersibility, gives it a competitive advantage (can get resources easier due to wings) (also can escape predator) - therefore affect other populations through out-competing other species or organism. Also, affect food availability to the predator.... if all offspring are winged and fly away then new food source?
This phenotypic change influences population dynamics and evolution.
Relevance to our Topic: Having the focus of scientific experiments on genetic knock-out and trying to compose genomes will not give us a FULL understanding of organisms, their ecology and evolution. This is (what I think) Denis Noble is saying. Maternal effects are sort of a more knowledgable version of Lamarck's idea about inherited acquired characteristics. Maternal effects mean that two hypothetical offspring of the same species could have the same genes and yet they could develop differently through maternal effects (or any epigenetic effect for that matter).
Marine example (Campbell et al., 1992): when female rainbow trouts experienced confinement during oogeneis they had higher levels of cortisol (stress hormone) and this resulted in smaller offspring with increased mortality rates. The environmental conditions experiences by the mother affect her offspring mortality ./ life history (smaller offspring = less successful, less likely to outcompete, more likely to be predated, perhaps less resource allocation so less efficient.... etc)
WHAT IS OUR TOPIC ABOUT
Can anybody shed some light?
From what I gather, the big QUESTION presented in our topic is:
How useful is genetic knock out / experimental manipulation research in our understanding of evolutionary physiology... since Denis Noble points out a number of other non-genetic influences on this.
Please feel free to correct me!
PS - in Noble's paper he posts this table... I feel like it summarises his main points - "the paradigm shift."
Sunday, 17 November 2013
Hello
So this is for us all to share our findings relevant to our study topic, read papers and post a link to them here, perhaps with a short summary of how it links to the topic. Comment on each others and do bloggy things. This is so we have plenty to talk about with Spicy J in the group sessions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)