Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By News Staff | November 19th 2007 12:58 PM | 1 comment | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
A multi-national team of biologists has concluded that developmental evolution is deterministic and orderly, rather than random, based on a study of different species of roundworms. The findings are reported in the latest issue of the journal Current Biology.

The researchers were interested in how development evolves in organs which themselves do not change. To do so, they examined the vulva—the female's copulatory and egg-laying organ—in nearly 50 species of roundworms. Because the vulva does not significantly change across species, one might predict that there would be little variation in vulva development.

However, the researchers found an astonishing amount of developmental variation. They then reasoned that this variation, since it did not affect the final adult vulva, should have evolved in a stochastic, or random, fashion.



In executing the study, the research team analyzed more than 40 characteristics of vulva development, including cell death, cell division patterns, and related aspects of gonad development. They plotted the evolution of these traits on a new phylogenetic tree, which illustrates how species are related to one another and provides a map as to how evolutionary changes are occurring.

Their results showed an even greater number of evolutionary changes in vulva development than the researchers had expected. In addition, they found that evolutionary changes among these species were unidirectional in nearly all instances. For example, they concluded that the number of cell divisions needed in vulva development declined over time—instead of randomly increasing and decreasing. In addition, the team noted that the number of rings used to form the vulva consistently declined during the evolutionary process. These results demonstrate that, even where we might expect evolution to be random, it is not.

The leading author is Karin Kiontke, a post-doctoral fellow in New York University’s Department of Biology. The research team included NYU Biology Professor David Fitch as well as researchers from the University of Paris, the Israel Institute of Technology, and the Max-Planck Institute for Developmental Biology in Germany.

The study was supported, in part, by a grant from the National Science Foundation.

Comments

The fact that the genetic input to evolution is not random has been glaringly obvious for some time - one of the most extreme examples being the addition of novel genes to genomes which should, according to classical random theory be at a rate proportional to the number of members of the species but which is, in fact, almost independent of the numbers. The error in the theory arises because of the incorrect assumption that evolution is passive. There are only three requirements for active goal-directed evolution and they do get met by some species at some times. 1) At the time of evolution there is a perceptible direction for an organism to mutate that can act as a stimulus. This can be as simple as the presence, in the same environment, of a species that is thriving far better than the evolving species - the thriving species has a more effective collection of genes therefore it is advantageous to mutate toward that collection. 2) There must be a behaviour that the evolving organism can follow that will move its genome in the desired direction as a response to the stimulus. The classic here is lateral gene transfer. Successful organisms tend to be profligate with genetic material so acquisition of genes from a more successful species is readily achieved. 3) The combination of the stimulus providing a direction to evolution and an appropriate response occurring must be sufficiently frequent for the evolutionary benefits of the combination to be reflected in a greater proportion of organisms exhibiting such a stimulus/response pairing. Active evolution provides a far better match to the statistics of evolution than the classic, neo-Darwinian passive version. For more details see the paper at www.nsof.co.nz

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.