Inheritance as Evolved and Evolving Physiological Processes

Acta Biotheoretica, 2017

The current debate over extending inheritance and its evolutionary impact has focused on adding new categories of non-genetic factors to the classical transmission of DNA, and on trying to redefine inheritance. Transmitted factors have been mainly characterized by their directions of transmission (vertical, horizontal, or both) and the way they store variations. In this paper, we leave aside the issue of defining inheritance. We rather try to build an evolutionary conceptual framework that allows for tracing most, if not all forms of transmission and makes sense of their different tempos and modes. We discuss three key distinctions that should in particular be the targets of theoretical and empirical investigation, and try to assess the interplay among them and evolutionary dynamics. We distinguish two channels of transmission (channel 1 and channel 2), two measurements of the temporal dynamics of transmission, respectively across and within generations (durability and residency), and two types of transmitted factors according to their evolutionary relevance (selectively relevant and neutral stable factors). By implementing these three distinctions we can then map different forms of transmission over a continuous space describing the combination of their varying dynamical features. While our aim is not to provide yet another model of inheritance, putting together these distinctions and crossing them, we manage to offer an inclusive conceptual framework of transmission, grounded in empirical observation, and coherent with evolutionary theory. This interestingly opens possibilities for qualitative and quantitative analyses, and is a necessary step, we argue, in order to question the interplay between the dynamics of evolution and the dynamics of multiple forms of transmission.

The Journal of Physiology, 2014

Physiology and evolutionary biology have developed as two separated disciplines, a separation that mirrored the hypothesis that the physiological and evolutionary processes could be decoupled. We argue that non‐genetic inheritance shatters the frontier between physiology and evolution, and leads to the coupling of physiological and evolutionary processes to a point where there exists a continuum between accommodation by phenotypic plasticity and adaptation by natural selection. This approach is also profoundly affecting the definition of the concept of phenotypic plasticity, which should now be envisaged as a multi‐scale concept. We further suggest that inclusive inheritance provides a quantitative way to help bridging infra‐individual (i.e. physiology) with supra‐individual (i.e. evolution) approaches, in a way that should help building the long sough inclusive evolutionary synthesis.

Biosystems, 2021

The article proposes to further develop the ideas of the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis by including into evolutionary research an analysis of phenomena that occur above the organismal level. We demonstrate that the current Extended Synthesis is focused more on individual traits (genetically or non-genetically inherited) and less on community system traits (synergetic/organizational traits) that characterize transgenerational biological, ecological, social, and cultural systems. In this regard, we will consider various communities that are made up of interacting populations, and for which the individual members can belong to the same or to different species. Examples of communities include biofilms, ant colonies, symbiotic associations resulting in holobiont formation, and human societies. The proposed model of evolution at the level of communities revises classic theorizing on the major transitions in evolution by analyzing the interplay between community/social traits and individual traits, and how this brings forth ideas of top-down regulations of bottom-up evolutionary processes (collabo-ration of downward and upward causation). The work demonstrates that such interplay also includes reticulate interactions and reticulate causation. In this regard, we exemplify how community systems provide various non-genetic 'scaffoldings', 'constraints', and 'affordances' for individual and sociocultural evolutionary development. Such research complements prevailing models that focus on the vertical transmission of heritable information , from parent to offspring, with research that instead focusses on horizontal, oblique and even reverse information transmission, going from offspring to parent. We call this reversed information transfer the 'offspring effect' to contrast it from the 'parental effect'. We argue that the proposed approach to inheritance is effective for modelling cumulative and distributed developmental process and for explaining the biological origins and evolution of language.

The 'Modern Synthesis' (Neo-Darwinism) is a mid-twentieth century gene-centric view of evolution, based on random mutations accumulating to produce gradual change through natural selection. Any role of physiological function in influencing genetic inheritance was excluded. The organism became a mere carrier of the real objects of selection: its genes. We now know that genetic change is far from random and often not gradual. Molecular genetics and genome sequencing have deconstructed this unnecessarily restrictive view of evolution in a way that reintroduces physiological function and interactions with the environment as factors influencing the speed and nature of inherited change. Acquired characteristics can be inherited, and in a few but growing number of cases that inheritance has now been shown to be robust for many generations. The twenty-first century can look forward to a new synthesis that will reintegrate physiology with evolutionary biology.

This article offers a novel, enlightened concept for determining the mechanism of evolution. It is based on homeostasis, which distinguishes life from nonlife and as such is the universal mechanism for the evolution of all living organisms. This view of evolution is logical, mechanistic, non-scalar, predictive, testable, and falsifiable, and it illuminates the epistemological relationships between physics and biology, ontogeny and phylogeny, development and aging, ultimate and proximate causation, health and disease. In addition to validating Haeckel's biogenetic law and Lamarckian epigenetics, reflecting the enabling value of the cellular approach, this perspective also expresses the evolutionary process at the cell-molecular level, since the mechanism of cell communication itself is universal in biology, in keeping with a Kuhnian paradigm shift. This approach may even elucidate the nature and evolution of consciousness as a manifestation of the cellular continuum from unicellular to multicellular life. We need such a functional genomic mechanism for the process of evolution if we are to make progress in biology and medicine. Like Copernican heliocentrism, a cellular approach to evolution may fundamentally change humankind's perceptions about our place in the universe.

History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 2019

Since the 1990s, results coming in from molecular phylogenetics necessitate us to recognize that Horizontal Gene Transfer (HGT) occurs massively across all three domains of life. Nonetheless, many of the mechanisms whereby genes can become transferred laterally have been known from the early twentieth century onward. The temporal discrepancy between the first historical observations of the processes, and the rather recent general acceptance of the documented data, poses an interesting epistemological conundrum: Why have incoming results on HGT been widely neglected by the general evolutionary community and what causes for a more favorable reception today? Five reasons are given: (1) HGT was first observed in the biomedical sciences and these sciences did not endorse an evolutionary epistemic stance because of the ontogeny/phylogeny divide adhered to by the founders of the Modern Synthesis. (2) Those who did entertain an evolutionary outlook associated research on HGT with a symbiotic epistemic framework. (3) That HGT occurs across all three domains of life was demonstrated by modern techniques developed in molecular biology, a field that itself awaits full integration into the general evolutionary synthesis. (4) Molecular phylogenetic studies of prokaryote evolution were originally associated with exobiology and abiogenesis, and both fields developed outside the framework provided by the Modern Synthesis. (5) Because HGT brings forth a pattern of reticulation, it contrasts the standard idea that evolution occurs solely by natural selection that brings forth a vertical, bifurcating pattern in the “tree” of life. Divided into two parts, this chapter first reviews current neo-Darwinian “tree of life” versus reticulate “web of life” polemics as they have been debated in high-profile academic journals, and secondly, the historical context of discovery of the various means whereby genes are transferred laterally is sketched. Along the way, the reader is introduced to how HGT contradicts some of the basic tenets of the neo-Darwinian paradigm.

Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 2000

Evolutionary physiology represents an explicit fusion of two complementary approaches: evolution and physiology. Stimulated by four major intellectual and methodological developments (explicit consideration of diverse evolutionary mechanisms, phylogenetic approaches, incorporation of the perspectives and tools of evolutionary genetics and selection studies, and generalization of molecular techniques to exotic organisms), this field achieved prominence during the past decade. It addresses three major questions regarding physiological evolution: (a) What are the historical, ecological, and phylogenetic patterns of physiological evolution? (b) How important are and were each of the known evolutionary processes (natural selection, sexual selection, drift, constraint, genetic coupling/hitchhiking, and others) in engendering or limiting physiological evolution? and (c) How do the genotype, phenotype, physiological performance, and fitness interact in influencing one another's future values? To answer these questions, evolutionary physiology examines extant and historical variation and diversity, standing genetic and phenotypic variability in populations, and past and ongoing natural selection in the wild. Also, it manipulates genotypes, phenotypes, and environments of evolving populations in the laboratory and field. Thus, evolutionary physiology represents the infusion of paradigms, techniques, and approaches of evolutionary biology, genetics, and systematics into physiology. The reciprocal infusion of physiological approaches into evolutionary biology and systematics can likewise have great value and is a future goal.

Nature Reviews Genetics, 2011

| Many biologists are calling for an 'extended evolutionary synthesis' that would 'modernize the modern synthesis' of evolution. Biological information is typically considered as being transmitted across generations by the DNA sequence alone, but accumulating evidence indicates that both genetic and non-genetic inheritance, and the interactions between them, have important effects on evolutionary outcomes. We review the evidence for such effects of epigenetic, ecological and cultural inheritance and parental effects, and outline methods that quantify the relative contributions of genetic and non-genetic heritability to the transmission of phenotypic variation across generations. These issues have implications for diverse areas, from the question of missing heritability in human complex-trait genetics to the basis of major evolutionary transitions.

Annual Review of Physiology, 1994

Evolutionary physiology represents an explicit fusion of two complementary approaches: evolution and physiology. Stimulated by four major intellectual and methodological developments (explicit consideration of diverse evolutionary mechanisms, phylogenetic approaches, incorporation of the perspectives and tools of evolutionary genetics and selection studies, and generalization of molecular techniques to exotic organisms), this field achieved prominence during the past decade. It addresses three major questions regarding physiological evolution: (a) What are the historical, ecological, and phylogenetic patterns of physiological evolution? (b) How important are and were each of the known evolutionary processes (natural selection, sexual selection, drift, constraint, genetic coupling/hitchhiking, and others) in engendering or limiting physiological evolution? and (c) How do the genotype, phenotype, physiological performance, and fitness interact in influencing one another's future values? To answer these questions, evolutionary physiology examines extant and historical variation and diversity, standing genetic and phenotypic variability in populations, and past and ongoing natural selection in the wild. Also, it manipulates genotypes, phenotypes, and environments of evolving populations in the laboratory and field. Thus, evolutionary physiology represents the infusion of paradigms, techniques, and approaches of evolutionary biology, genetics, and systematics into physiology. The reciprocal infusion of physiological approaches into evolutionary biology and systematics can likewise have great value and is a future goal.