Unit of selection

Last updated
David Sloan Wilson and Elliott Sober's 1994 Multilevel Selection Model, illustrated by a nested set of Russian matryoshka dolls. Wilson himself compared his model to such a set. Wilson's Matryoshka Doll Multilevel Selection Model.jpg
David Sloan Wilson and Elliott Sober's 1994 Multilevel Selection Model, illustrated by a nested set of Russian matryoshka dolls. Wilson himself compared his model to such a set.

A unit of selection is a biological entity within the hierarchy of biological organization (for example, an entity such as: a self-replicating molecule, a gene, a cell, an organism, a group, or a species) that is subject to natural selection. There is debate among evolutionary biologists about the extent to which evolution has been shaped by selective pressures acting at these different levels. [1] [2] [3]

Contents

There is debate over the relative importance of the units themselves. For instance, is it group or individual selection that has driven the evolution of altruism? Where altruism reduces the fitness of individuals, individual-centered explanations for the evolution of altruism become complex and rely on the use of game theory, [4] [5] for instance; see kin selection and group selection. There also is debate over the definition of the units themselves, [6] and the roles for selection and replication, [2] and whether these roles may change in the course of evolution. [7]

Fundamental theory

Two useful introductions to the fundamental theory underlying the unit of selection issue and debate, which also present examples of multi-level selection from the entire range of the biological hierarchy (typically with entities at level N-1 competing for increased representation, i.e., higher frequency, at the immediately higher level N, e.g., organisms in populations or cell lineages in organisms), are Richard Lewontin's classic piece The Units of Selection [8] and John Maynard-Smith and Eörs Szathmáry's co-authored book, The Major Transitions in Evolution . As a theoretical introduction to units of selection, Lewontin writes:

The generality of the principles of natural selection means that any entities in nature that have variation, reproduction, and heritability may evolve. ...the principles can be applied equally to genes, organisms, populations, species, and at opposite ends of the scale, prebiotic molecules and ecosystems." (1970, pp. 1-2)

Elisabeth Lloyd's book The Structure and Confirmation of Evolutionary Theory provides a basic philosophical introduction to the debate. Three more recent introductions include Samir Okasha's book Evolution and the Levels of Selection, Pierrick Bourrat's book Facts, Conventions, and the Levels of Selection, and Elisabeth Lloyd and Javier Suárez book Units of Selection.

Selection at each level

Below, cases of selection at the genic, cellular, individual and group level from within the multi-level selection perspective are presented and discussed.

Nucleic acid

George C. Williams in his influential book Adaptation and Natural Selection was one of the first to present a gene-centered view of evolution with the gene as the unit of selection, arguing that a unit of selection should exhibit a high degree of permanence.

Richard Dawkins has written several books popularizing and expanding the idea. According to Dawkins, genes cause phenotypes and a gene is 'judged' by its phenotypic effects. Dawkins distinguishes entities which survive or fail to survive ("replicators") from entities with temporary existence that interact directly with the environment ("vehicles"). Genes are "replicators" whereas individuals and groups of individuals are "vehicles". Dawkins argues that, although they are both aspects of the same process, "replicators" rather than "vehicles" should be preferred as units of selection. This is because replicators, owing to their permanence, should be regarded as the ultimate beneficiaries of adaptations. Genes are replicators and therefore the gene is the unit of selection. Dawkins further expounded this view in an entire chapter called 'God's utility function' in the book River Out of Eden where he explained that genes alone have utility functions. [9]

Some clear-cut examples of selection at the level of the gene include meiotic drive and retrotransposons. In both of these cases, gene sequences increase their relative frequency in a population without necessarily providing benefits at other levels of organization. Meiotic-drive mutations (see segregation distortion) manipulate the machinery of chromosomal segregation so that chromosomes carrying the mutation are later found in more than half of the gametes produced by individuals heterozygous for the mutation, and for this reason the frequency of the mutation increases in the population.

Retrotransposons are DNA sequences that, once replicated by the cellular machinery, insert themselves in the genome more or less randomly. Such insertions can be very mutagenic and thus reduce drastically individual fitness, so that there is strong selection against elements that are very active. Meiotic-drive alleles have also been shown strongly to reduce individual fitness, clearly exemplifying the potential conflict between selection at different levels.

According to the RNA world hypothesis, RNA sequences performing both enzymatic and information storage roles in autocatalytic sets were an early unit of selection and evolution that would later transition into living cells. [10] It is possible that RNA-based evolution is still taking place today. Other subcellular entities such as viruses, both DNA-based and RNA-based, do evolve.

The gene-centered view of evolution normally refers to selection among different alleles of the same gene. However, gene families also differ in their tendency to diversify and avoid loss during evolution. [11] This latter form of selection more closely resembles clade selection of groups of species.

Epigene

There is also view that evolution is acting on epigenes. [12]

Cell

Leo Buss in his book The Evolution of Individuality proposes that much of the evolution of development in animals reflects the conflict between selective pressures acting at the level of the cell and those acting at the level of the multicellular individual. This perspective can shed new light on phenomena as diverse as gastrulation and germ line sequestration.

This selection for unconstrained proliferation is in conflict with the fitness interests of the individual, and thus there is tension between selection at the level of the cell and selection at the level of the individual. Since the proliferation of specific cells of the vertebrate immune system to fight off infecting pathogens is a case of programmed and exquisitely contained cellular proliferation, it represents a case of the individual manipulating selection at the level of the cell to enhance its own fitness. In the case of the vertebrate immune system, selection at the level of the cell and individual are not in conflict.

Some view cancer stem cells as units of selection. [13]

Behavioural

Gene–culture coevolution was developed to explain how human behavior is a product of two different and interacting evolutionary processes: genetic evolution and cultural evolution.

Organism

Selection at the level of the organism can be described as Darwinism, and is well understood and considered common. If a relatively faster gazelle manages to survive and reproduce more, the causation of the higher fitness of this gazelle can be fully accounted for if one looks at how individual gazelles fare under predation.

The speed of the faster gazelle could be caused by a single gene, be polygenic, or be fully environmentally determined, but the unit of selection in this case is the individual since speed is a property of each individual gazelle.

When speaking about individual organism evolution an extended phenotype and superorganism must be also mentioned.

Group

If a group of organisms, owing to their interactions or division of labor, provides superior fitness compared to other groups, where the fitness of the group is higher or lower than the mean fitness of the constituent individuals, group selection can be declared to occur. [14]

Specific syndromes of selective factors can create situations in which groups are selected because they display group properties which are selected-for. Many common examples of group traits are reducible to individual traits, however. Selection of these traits is thus more simply explained as selection of individual traits.

Some mosquito-transmitted rabbit viruses are only transmitted to uninfected rabbits from infected rabbits which are still alive. This creates a selective pressure on every group of viruses already infecting a rabbit not to become too virulent and kill their host rabbit before enough mosquitoes have bitten it, since otherwise all the viruses inside the dead rabbit would rot with it. And indeed in natural systems such viruses display much lower virulence levels than do mutants of the same viruses that in laboratory culture readily outcompete non-virulent variants (or than do tick-transmitted viruses since ticks do bite dead rabbits).

In the previous passage, the group is assumed to have "lower virulence", i.e., "virulence" is presented as a group trait. One could argue then that the selection is in fact against individual viruses that are too virulent. In this case, however, the fitness of all viruses within a rabbit is affected by what the group does to the rabbit. Indeed, the proper, directly selected group property is that of "not killing the rabbit too early" rather than individual virulence. In situations such as these, we would expect there to be selection for cooperation amongst the viruses in a group in such a way that the group will not "kill the rabbit too early". It is of course true that any group behavior is the result of individual traits, such as individual viruses suppressing the virulence of their neighbours, but the causes of phenotypes are rarely the causes of fitness differences.

Species and higher levels

It remains controversial among biologists whether selection can operate at and above the level of species. [15] Proponents of species selection include R. A. Fisher (1929); [15] Sewall Wright (1956); [15] Richard Lewontin (1970); [15] Niles Eldredge & Stephen Jay Gould (1972); Steven M. Stanley (1975). [16] [15] Gould proposed that there exist macroevolutionary processes which shape evolution, not driven by the microevolutionary mechanisms of the Modern Synthesis. [17] If one views species as entities that replicate (speciate) and die (go extinct) within a clade, then species could be subject to selection and thus could change their occurrence over geological time, much as heritable selected-for traits change theirs over generations. For evolution to be driven by species selection, differential success must be the result of selection upon species-intrinsic properties, rather than for properties of genes, cells, individuals, or populations within species. Such properties include, for example, population structure, their propensity to speciate, extinction rates, and geological persistence. While the fossil record shows differential persistence of species, examples of species-intrinsic properties subject to natural selection have been much harder to document.

One issue with selection among clades is that they are not independent, i.e. all species are descended from the same last universal common ancestor and are thus part of the same clade. [1] This criticism does not apply to selection among different gene families that are not evolutionarily related, and which are duplicated and lost at different rates rather than speciating and going extinct at different rates. [11]

In the microbial realm, it has been interpreted that the unit of selection is a blend of ecological and functional behaviors, or guilds, beyond the species-level. [18]

Related Research Articles

Microevolution is the change in allele frequencies that occurs over time within a population. This change is due to four different processes: mutation, selection, gene flow and genetic drift. This change happens over a relatively short amount of time compared to the changes termed macroevolution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Natural selection</span> Mechanism of evolution by differential survival and reproduction of individuals

Natural selection is the differential survival and reproduction of individuals due to differences in phenotype. It is a key mechanism of evolution, the change in the heritable traits characteristic of a population over generations. Charles Darwin popularised the term "natural selection", contrasting it with artificial selection, which is intentional, whereas natural selection is not.

Sociobiology is a field of biology that aims to explain social behavior in terms of evolution. It draws from disciplines including psychology, ethology, anthropology, evolution, zoology, archaeology, and population genetics. Within the study of human societies, sociobiology is closely allied to evolutionary anthropology, human behavioral ecology, evolutionary psychology, and sociology.

<i>The Selfish Gene</i> 1976 book by Richard Dawkins

The Selfish Gene is a 1976 book on evolution by ethologist Richard Dawkins that promotes the gene-centred view of evolution, as opposed to views focused on the organism and the group. The book builds upon the thesis of George C. Williams's Adaptation and Natural Selection (1966); it also popularized ideas developed during the 1960s by W. D. Hamilton and others. From the gene-centred view, it follows that the more two individuals are genetically related, the more sense it makes for them to behave cooperatively with each other.

<i>The Extended Phenotype</i> 1982 book by Richard Dawkins

The Extended Phenotype is a 1982 book by the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, in which the author introduced a biological concept of the same name. The book's main idea is that phenotype should not be limited to biological processes such as protein biosynthesis or tissue growth, but extended to include all effects that a gene has on its environment, inside or outside the body of the individual organism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Richard Lewontin</span> American evolutionary biologist and mathematician (1929–2021)

Richard Charles Lewontin was an American evolutionary biologist, mathematician, geneticist, and social commentator. A leader in developing the mathematical basis of population genetics and evolutionary theory, he applied techniques from molecular biology, such as gel electrophoresis, to questions of genetic variation and evolution.

Virulence is a pathogen's or microorganism's ability to cause damage to a host.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Group selection</span> Proposed mechanism of evolution

Group selection is a proposed mechanism of evolution in which natural selection acts at the level of the group, instead of at the level of the individual or gene.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Index of evolutionary biology articles</span>

This is a list of topics in evolutionary biology.

In evolutionary biology, inclusive fitness is one of two metrics of evolutionary success as defined by W. D. Hamilton in 1964:

Evolutionary game theory (EGT) is the application of game theory to evolving populations in biology. It defines a framework of contests, strategies, and analytics into which Darwinian competition can be modelled. It originated in 1973 with John Maynard Smith and George R. Price's formalisation of contests, analysed as strategies, and the mathematical criteria that can be used to predict the results of competing strategies.

The gene-centered view of evolution, gene's eye view, gene selection theory, or selfish gene theory holds that adaptive evolution occurs through the differential survival of competing genes, increasing the allele frequency of those alleles whose phenotypic trait effects successfully promote their own propagation. The proponents of this viewpoint argue that, since heritable information is passed from generation to generation almost exclusively by DNA, natural selection and evolution are best considered from the perspective of genes.

Developmental systems theory (DST) is an overarching theoretical perspective on biological development, heredity, and evolution. It emphasizes the shared contributions of genes, environment, and epigenetic factors on developmental processes. DST, unlike conventional scientific theories, is not directly used to help make predictions for testing experimental results; instead, it is seen as a collection of philosophical, psychological, and scientific models of development and evolution. As a whole, these models argue the inadequacy of the modern evolutionary synthesis on the roles of genes and natural selection as the principal explanation of living structures. Developmental systems theory embraces a large range of positions that expand biological explanations of organismal development and hold modern evolutionary theory as a misconception of the nature of living processes.

<i>Dawkins vs. Gould</i> Book by Kim Sterelny

Dawkins vs. Gould: Survival of the Fittest is a book about the differing views of biologists Richard Dawkins and Stephen Jay Gould by philosopher of biology Kim Sterelny. When published in 2001 it became an international best-seller. A new edition was published in 2007 to include Gould's The Structure of Evolutionary Theory finished shortly before his death in 2002, and recent works by Dawkins. The synopsis below is from the 2007 publication.

An organism is any living thing that functions as an individual. Such a definition raises more problems than it solves, not least because the concept of an individual is also difficult. Many criteria, few of them widely accepted, have been proposed to define what an organism is. Among the most common is that an organism has autonomous reproduction, growth, and metabolism. This would exclude viruses, despite the fact that they evolve like organisms. Other problematic cases include colonial organisms; a colony of eusocial insects is organised adaptively, and has germ-soma specialisation, with some insects reproducing, others not, like cells in an animal's body. The body of a siphonophore, a jelly-like marine animal, is composed of organism-like zooids, but the whole structure looks and functions much like an animal such as a jellyfish, the parts collaborating to provide the functions of the colonial organism.

The theoretical foundations of evolutionary psychology are the general and specific scientific theories that explain the ultimate origins of psychological traits in terms of evolution. These theories originated with Charles Darwin's work, including his speculations about the evolutionary origins of social instincts in humans. Modern evolutionary psychology, however, is possible only because of advances in evolutionary theory in the 20th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Outline of evolution</span> Overview of and topical guide to change in the heritable characteristics of organisms

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to evolution:

Inclusive fitness in humans is the application of inclusive fitness theory to human social behaviour, relationships and cooperation.

Reciprocal altruism in humans refers to an individual behavior that gives benefit conditionally upon receiving a returned benefit, which draws on the economic concept – ″gains in trade″. Human reciprocal altruism would include the following behaviors : helping patients, the wounded, and the others when they are in crisis; sharing food, implement, knowledge.

This glossary of genetics and evolutionary biology is a list of definitions of terms and concepts used in the study of genetics and evolutionary biology, as well as sub-disciplines and related fields, with an emphasis on classical genetics, quantitative genetics, population biology, phylogenetics, speciation, and systematics. It has been designed as a companion to Glossary of cellular and molecular biology, which contains many overlapping and related terms; other related glossaries include Glossary of biology and Glossary of ecology.

References

  1. 1 2 Okasha, S. (2006) Evolution and the levels of selection. Oxford University Press.
  2. 1 2 Hull, David L.; Langman, Rodney E.; Glenn, Sigrid S. (2001). "Chapter 3: A general account of selection" . Science and Selection: Essays on biological evolution and the philosophy of science. Cambridge University Press. ISBN   9780521644051.
  3. ↑ Zee, Peter; Dyken, J. David Van; Bever, James D.; Richerson, Peter J.; Fletcher, Jeffrey A.; Linksvayer, Timothy A.; Breden, Felix; Fields, Peter; Edmund D. Brodie Iii (February 2010). "Multilevel and kin selection in a connected world". Nature. 463 (7283): E8–E9. Bibcode:2010Natur.463....8W. doi:10.1038/nature08809. ISSN   1476-4687. PMC   3151728 . PMID   20164866.
  4. ↑ Maynard Smith, John (1986). "The evolution of animal intelligence". In Hookway, Christopher (ed.). Minds, Machines and Evolution. CUP Archive. p. 64. ISBN   9780521338288.
  5. ↑ Dugatkin, Lee Alan (1998). "§3.2.3 Category III: Group selection". In Dugatkin, Lee Alan; Reeve, Hudson Kern (eds.). Game Theory and Animal Behavior. Oxford University Press. p. 52. ISBN   9780195350203. group-selected cooperation can always be cast within some broad-based individual selection model
  6. ↑ Bourrat, Pierrick (August 2021). Facts, Conventions, and the Levels of Selection. doi:10.1017/9781108885812. ISBN   9781108885812. S2CID   238732212 . Retrieved 2021-08-23.{{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
  7. ↑ von Sydow, Momme (2012). From Darwinian Metaphysics towards Understanding the Evolution of Evolutionary Mechanisms. A Historical and Philosophical Analysis of Gene-Darwinism and Universal Darwinism. Universitaetsverlag Goettingen Press. p. 481. ISBN   978-3863950064.
  8. ↑ Lewontin, Richard 1970. The Units of Selection. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 1: 1-18.
  9. ↑ See the chapter God's utility function in Dawkins, Richard (1995). River Out of Eden. Basic Books. ISBN   0-465-06990-8.
  10. ↑ Bernhardt, Harold S. (2012). "The RNA world hypothesis: The worst theory of the early evolution of life (except for all the others)a". Biology Direct. 7: 23. doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-7-23 . PMC   3495036 . PMID   22793875.
  11. 1 2 James, Jennifer E; Nelson, Paul G; Masel, Joanna (4 April 2023). "Differential Retention of Pfam Domains Contributes to Long-term Evolutionary Trends". Molecular Biology and Evolution. 40 (4): msad073. doi:10.1093/molbev/msad073. PMC   10089649 . PMID   36947137.
  12. ↑ Hunter, P. (2009). "Extended phenotype redux. How far can the reach of genes extend in manipulating the environment of an organism?". EMBO Rep. 10 (3): 212–5. doi:10.1038/embor.2009.18. PMC   2658563 . PMID   19255576.
  13. ↑ Greaves, Mel (2013). "Cancer stem cells as 'units of selection'". Evolutionary Applications. 6 (1): 102–108. Bibcode:2013EvApp...6..102G. doi:10.1111/eva.12017. PMC   3567475 . PMID   23396760.
  14. ↑ "Group selection | biology".
  15. 1 2 3 4 5 Vrba, Elisabeth S. (1984). "What is Species Selection?". Systematic Zoology. 33 (3): 318–328. doi:10.2307/2413077. JSTOR   2413077.
  16. ↑ Stanley, SM (1975). "A theory of evolution above the species level". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 72 (2): 646–650. Bibcode:1975PNAS...72..646S. doi: 10.1073/pnas.72.2.646 . PMC   432371 . PMID   1054846.
  17. ↑ Lieberman, Bruce S.; Vrba, Elisabeth S. (Spring 2005). "Stephen Jay Gould on species selection: 30 years of insight" (PDF). Paleobiology. 31 (2 Suppl): 113–121. doi:10.1666/0094-8373(2005)031[0113:SJGOSS]2.0.CO;2. S2CID   14801676. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-09-18. Retrieved 2012-07-08.
  18. ↑ Shapiro, B. Jesse; Polz, Martin F. (May 2014). "Ordering microbial diversity into ecologically and genetically cohesive units". Trends in Microbiology. 22 (5): 235–247. doi:10.1016/j.tim.2014.02.006. hdl:1721.1/101684. ISSN   0966-842X. PMC   4103024 . PMID   24630527.

Sources

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.