The developmental renaissance in adaptationism

Trends in Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 278-287

  Olson, Mark E ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD NACIONAL AUTÓNOMA DE MÉXICO   (Mexico)

Author keywords

Adaptation; Artificial selection; Constraint; Development; Natural selection; Ontogeny; Teratology

Indexed keywords

ADAPTATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EMBRYO; EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY; HYPOTHESIS TESTING; MORPHOLOGY; NATURAL SELECTION; ONTOGENY; PHENOTYPE;

ADAPTATION; EVOLUTION; GENETIC SELECTION; GENOTYPE; GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; PHENOTYPE; REVIEW;

ADAPTATION, BIOLOGICAL; BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; GENOTYPE; GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT; PHENOTYPE; SELECTION, GENETIC;

EID: 84859968929     PISSN: 01695347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2011.12.005     Document Type: Review

References (99)

1. Gould S.J., Lewontin R. The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptionist programme. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 1979, 205:581-598.
2. Godfrey-Smith P., Wilkins J.F. Adaptationism. A Companion to the Philosophy of Biology 2008, 186-201. Blackwell. S. Sarkar, A. Plutynski (Eds.).
3. Nielsen R. Adaptationism: 30 years after Gould and Lewontin. Evolution 2009, 63:2487-2490.
4. West G.B., Brown J.H. The origin of allometric scaling laws in biology from genomes to ecosystems: towards a quantitative unifying theory of biological structure and organization. J. Exp. Biol. 2005, 208:1575-1592.
5. Fodor J., Piattelli-Palmarini M. What Darwin Got Wrong 2010, Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
6. Lewens T. Organisms and Artifacts: Design in Nature and Elsewhere 2004, MIT Press.
7. Klingenberg C.P. Evolution and development of shape: integrating quantitative approaches. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2010, 11:623-635.
8. Schlichting C.D. Hidden reaction norms, cryptic genetic variation, and evolvability. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2008, 1133:187-203.
9. Minelli A. Perspectives in Animal Phylogeny and Evolution 2009, Oxford University Press.
10. Alberch P. The logic of monsters: evidence for internal constraint in development and evolution. Geobios Mémoire Spécial 1989, 12:21-57.
11. Reiss J., et al. Pere Alberch: originator of EvoDevo. Biol. Theory 2009, 3:351-356.
12. Blumberg M.S. Freaks of Nature: What Anomalies Tell Us about Development and Evolution 2009, Oxford University Press.
13. Friedman J.M. The principles of teratology: are they still true?. Birth Defects Res. A: Clin. 2010, 88:766-768.
14. Tomić N., Meyer-Rochow V.B. Atavisms: medical, genetic, and evolutionary implications. Perspect. Biol. Med. 2011, 54:332-353.
15. Beckwith J.B. A hitchhiker's guide to the older literature of descriptive teratology. Am. J. Med. Genet. A 2007, 143A:2862-2867.
16. Galis F., et al. Extreme selection in humans against homeotic transformations of cervical vertebrae. Evolution 2006, 60:2643-2654.
17. Flores-Rentería L., et al. Functional bisporangiate cones in Pinus johannis (Pinaceae): implications for the evolution of bisexuality in seed plants. Am. J. Bot. 2011, 98:130-139.
18. Sinervo B., Licht P. Proximate constraints on the evolution of egg size, number, and total clutch mass in lizards. Science 1991, 252:1300-1302.
19. Sinervo B., McAdam A.G. Maturational costs of reproduction due to clutch size and ontogenetic conflict as revealed in the invisible fraction. Proc. R. Soc. B 2008, 275:629-638.
20. Bertram D.F., et al. Evolutionary and experimental change in egg volume, heterochrony of larval body and juvenile rudiment, and evolutionary reversibility in pluteus form. Evol. Dev. 2009, 11:728-739.
21. Cox R.M., Calsbeek R. Severe costs of reproduction persist in Anolis lizards despite the evolution of a single-egg clutch. Evolution 2009, 64:1321-1330.
22. Klooster M.R., et al. Cryptic bracts facilitate herbivore avoidance in the mycoheterotrophic plant Monotropsis odorata (Ericaceae). Am. J. Bot. 2009, 96:2197-2205.
23. Dudash M.R., et al. Experimental floral and inflorescence trait manipulations affect pollinator preference and function in a hummingbird-pollinated plant. Am. J. Bot. 2011, 98:275-282.
24. Sellin A., et al. Is distribution of hydraulic constraints within tree crowns reflected in photosynthetic water-use efficiency? An example of Betula pendula. Ecol. Res. 2010, 25:173-183.
25. Polak M., Rashed A. Microscale laser surgery reveals adaptive function of male intromittent genitalia. Proc. R. Soc. B 2010, 277:1371-1376.
26. Drake A.G., Klingenberg C.P. Large-scale diversification of skull shape in domestic dogs: disparity and modularity. Am. Nat. 2010, 175:289-301.
27. Conner J.K., et al. Rapid independent trait evolution despite a strong pleiotropic genetic correlation. Am. Nat. 2011, 178:429-441.
28. Allen C., et al. Differences in the selection response of serially repeated color pattern characters: standing variation, development, and evolution. BMC Evol. Biol. 2008, 10.1186/1471-2148-8-94.
29. Tobler A., Nijhout H.F. Developmental constraints on the evolution of wing-body allometry in Manduca sexta. Evol. Dev. 2010, 12:592-600.
30. Frankino W.A., et al. Experimental approaches to studying the evolution of animal form: the shape of things to come. Experimental Evolution: Concepts, Methods, and Applications of Selection Experiments 2010, 419-478. University of California Press. T. Garland, M.R. Rose (Eds.).
31. Fuller R.C., et al. How and when selection experiments might actually be useful. Integr. Comp. Biol. 2005, 45:391-404.
32. Erwin D.H. Microevolution and macroevolution are not governed by the same processes. Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology 2010, 180-193. Blackwell. F.J. Ayala, R. Arp (Eds.).
33. Polly P.D. Developmental dynamics and G-matrices: can morphometric spaces be used to model phenotypic evolution?. Evol. Biol. 2008, 35:83-89.
34. Penet L., et al. Constraints and selection: insights from microsporogenesis in Asparagales. Evol. Dev. 2007, 9:460-471.
35. Clements R., et al. Further twists in gastropod shell evolution. Biol. Lett. 2008, 4:179-182.
36. Figueirido B., et al. Shape at the cross-roads: homoplasy and history in the evolution of the carnivoran skull towards herbivory. J. Evol. Biol. 2010, 23:2579-2594.
37. Meloro C., Raia P. Cats and dogs down the tree: the tempo and mode of evolution in the lower carnassial of fossil and living Carnivora. Evol. Biol. 2010, 37:177-186.
38. Donovan L.A., et al. The evolution of the worldwide leaf economics spectrum. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2011, 26:88-95.
39. Minelli A. Forms of Becoming: The Evolutionary Biology of Development 2009, Princeton University Press.
40. Vedel V., et al. An early temperature-sensitive period for the plasticity of segment number in the centipede Strigamia maritima. Evol. Dev. 2010, 12:347-352.
41. Prud'homme B., et al. Body plan innovation in treehoppers through the evolution of an extra wing-like appendage. Nature 2011, 473:83-86.
42. Yoshizawa K. The treehopper's helmet is not homologous with wings (Hemiptera: Membracidae). Syst. Entomol. 2012, 37:2-6.
43. McGhee G.R. The Geometry of Evolution: Adaptive Landscapes and Theoretical Morphospaces 2007, Cambridge University Press.
44. Hauser M.D. The possibility of impossible cultures. Nature 2009, 460:190-196.
45. Prusinkiewicz P., et al. Evolution and development of inflorescence architectures. Science 2007, 316:1452-1456.
46. Psujek S., Beer R.D. Developmental bias in evolution: evolutionary accessibility of phenotypes in a model evo-devo system. Evol. Dev. 2008, 10:375-390.
47. Niklas K.J. Deducing plant function from organic form: challenges and pitfalls. Form and Function in Developmental Evolution 2009, 47-82. Cambridge University Press. M.D. Laublichler, J. Maienschein (Eds.).
48. Dera G., et al. The flourishing diversity of models in theoretical morphology: from current practices to future macroevolutionary and bioenvironmental challenges. Paleobiology 2008, 34:301-317.
49. Honeycutt R.L. Small changes, big results: evolution of morphological discontinuity in mammals. J. Biol. 2008, 10.1186/jbiol71.
50. Wagner G.P. The developmental genetics of homology. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2007, 8:473-479.
51. Arthur W. Conflicting hypotheses on the nature of mega-evolution. Evolving Pathways: Key Themes in Evolutionary Developmental Biology 2008, 50-61. Cambridge University Press. A. Minelli, G. Fusco (Eds.).
52. Lesniewska M., et al. Trunk anomalies in the centipede Stigmatogaster subterranea provide insight into late-embryonic segmentation. Arthropod Struct. Dev. 2009, 38:417-426.
53. Vargas A.O., Wagner G. Frame-shifts of digit identity in bird evolution and cyclopamine-treated wings. Evol. Dev. 2009, 11:163-169.
54. Gerber S., et al. Developmental aspects of morphological disparity dynamics: a simple analytical exploration. Paleobiology 2011, 37:237-251.
55. Hautier L., et al. Skeletal development in sloths and the evolution of mammalian vertebral patterning. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2010, 107:18903-18908.
56. Jamniczky H.A., Hallgrímsson B. A comparison of covariance structure in wild and laboratory muroid crania. Evolution 2009, 63:1540-1556.
57. Van Tassel D.L., et al. Missing domesticated plant forms: can artificial selection fill the gap?. Evol. Appl. 2010, 3:434-452.
58. Poelwijk F.J., et al. Empirical fitness landscapes reveal accessible evolutionary paths. Nature 2007, 445:383-386.
59. Jordan C.Y., Harder L.D. Manipulation of bee behavior by inflorescence architecture and its consequences for plant mating. Am. Nat. 2006, 167:496-509.
60. Brakefield P.M. Prospects of evo-devo for linking pattern and process in the evolution of morphospace. Evolving Pathways: Key Themes in Evolutionary Developmental Biology 2008, 62-79. Cambridge University Press. A. Minelli, G. Fusco (Eds.).
61. Sterelny K., Griffiths P.E. Sex and Death. An Introduction to the Philosophy of Biology 1999, University of Chicago Press.
62. Amundson R. The Changing Role of the Embryo in Evolutionary Thought: Roots of Evo-Devo 2005, Cambridge University Press.
63. Sterelny K. Novelty, plasticity and niche construction: the influence of phenotypic variation on evolution. Mapping the Future of Biology: Evolving Concepts and Theories 2009, 93-109. Springer. A. Barberousse (Ed.).
64. Badyaev A.V. Origin of the fittest: link between emergent variation and evolutionary change as a critical question in evolutionary biology. Proc. R. Soc. Biol. Sci. B 2011, 278:1921-1929.
65. Weber B.H. Extending and expanding the Darwinian synthesis: the role of complex systems dynamics. Stud. Hist. Philos. Biol. Biomed. Sci. 2011, 42:75-81.
66. Buchanan A.V., et al. What are genes 'for' or where are traits 'from'? What is the question?. BioEssays 2009, 31:198-208.
67. Salazar-Ciudad I. Making evolutionary predictions about the structure of development and morphology: beyond the neo-Darwinian and constraints paradigms. Evolving Pathways: Key Themes in Evolutionary Developmental Biology 2008, 31-49. Cambridge University Press. A. Minelli, G. Fusco (Eds.).
68. Arthur W. Evolution: A Developmental Approach 2011, Blackwell.
69. Losos J.B. Convergence, adaptation, and constraint. Evolution 2011, 65:1827-1840.
70. Arthur A. Biased Embryos and Evolution 2004, Cambridge University Press.
71. Raff R. The Shape of Life 1996, University of Chicago Press.
72. West-Eberhard M.J. Developmental Plasticity and Evolution 2003, Oxford University Press.
73. Eble G.J. Developmental morphospaces and evolution. Evolutionary Dynamics: Exploring the Interplay of Selection, Accident, Neutrality, and Function 2003, 33-63. Oxford University Press. J.P. Crutchfield, P. Schuster (Eds.).
74. Williams W.R. Polymastism, with special reference to mammae erraticae and the development of neoplasms from supernumerary mammary structures. J. Anat. Physiol. 1891, 25:225-255.
75. Depew D.J. Adaptation as process: the future of Darwinism and the legacy of Theodosius Dobzhansky. Stud. Hist. Philos. Biol. Biomed. Sci. 2011, 42:89-98.
76. Richardson M.K., Chipman A.D. Developmental constraints in a comparative framework: a test case using variation in phalanx number during amniote evolution. J. Exp. Zool. B 2003, 296B:8-22.
77. Sansom R. The nature of developmental constraints and the difference-maker argument for externalism. Biol. Philos. 2009, 24:441-459.
78. Fusco G. How many processes are responsible for phenotypic evolution?. Evol. Dev. 2001, 3:279-286.
79. Pigliucci M., Kaplan J. Making Sense of Evolution: The Conceptual Foundations of Evolutionary Biology 2006, Chicago University Press.
80. Pigliucci M. Finding the way in phenotypic space: the origin and maintenance of constraints on organismal form. Ann. Bot. 2007, 100:433-438.
81. Shanahan T. Phylogenetic inertia and Darwin's higher law. Stud. Hist. Philos. Biol. Biomed. Sci. 2011, 42:60-68.
82. Shanahan T. Why don't zebras have machine guns? Adaptation, selection, and constraints in evolutionary theory. Stud. Hist. Philos. Biol. Biomed. Sci. 2008, 39:135-146.
83. Halley J.D., Winkler D.A. Critical-like self-organization and natural selection: two facets of a single evolutionary process?. BioSystems 2008, 92:148-158.
84. Batten D., et al. Visions of evolution: self-organization proposes what natural selection disposes. Biol. Theory 2008, 3:17-29.
85. Striedter G.F. Stepping into the same river twice: homologues as recurring attractors in epigenetic landscapes. Brain Behav. Evol. 1998, 52:218-232.
86. Swartz S.M., Middleton K.M. Biomechanics of the bat limb skeleton: scaling, material properties and mechanics. Cells Tissues Organs 2008, 187:59-84.
87. Elgin M. There may be strict empirical laws in biology, after all. Biol. Philos. 2006, 21:119-134.
88. Bone Pathology 2009, Humana. 2nd edn. J.S. Khurana (Ed.).
89. Sanger T.J., et al. Developmental and genetic origins of murine long bone length variation. J. Exp. Zool. 2011, 316:146-161.
90. Darwin C. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection 1859, J. Murray.
91. Griffiths P. The historical turn in the study of adaptation. Brit. J. Philos. Sci. 1996, 47:511-532.
92. Lipton P. Inference to the best explanation. The Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Science 2008, 193-202. Routledge. S. Psillos, M. Curd (Eds.).
93. Futuyma D.J. Evolution 2005, Sinauer.
94. Houston A.I. San Marco and evolutionary biology. Biol. Philos. 2009, 24:215-230.
95. Reid R.G.B. Biological Emergences: Evolution by Natural Experiment 2007, MIT Press.
96. Minelli A. Evolutionary developmental biology does not offer a significant challenge to the Neo-Darwinian paradigm. Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology 2010, 213-226. Blackwell. F.J. Ayala, R. Arp (Eds.).
97. Gordon D.M. Ant Encounters: Interaction Networks and Colony Behavior 2010, Princeton University Press.
98. Held L.I. Quirks of Human Anatomy: An Evo-Devo Look at the Human Body 2009, Cambridge University Press.
99. Gilbert S.F., Epel D. Ecological Developmental Biology 2009, Sinauer.