The Experts below are selected from a list of 54105 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
John Odlingsmee - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the extended evolutionary Synthesis its structure assumptions and predictions
Proceedings of The Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2015Co-Authors: Kevin N Laland, Eva Jablonka, Gerd B Muller, Tobias Uller, Marcus W Feldman, Kim Sterelny, Armin P Moczek, John OdlingsmeeAbstract:Scientific activities take place within the structured sets of ideas and assumptions that define a field and its practices. The conceptual framework of evolutionary biology emerged with the Modern Synthesis in the early twentieth century and has since expanded into a highly successful research program to explore the processes of diversification and adaptation. Nonetheless, the ability of that framework satisfactorily to accommodate the rapid advances in developmental biology, genomics and ecology has been questioned. We review some of these arguments, focusing on literatures (evo-devo, developmental plasticity, inclusive inheritance and niche construction) whose implications for evolution can be interpreted in two ways—one that preserves the internal structure of contemporary evolutionary theory and one that points towards an alternative conceptual framework. The latter, which we label the ‘extended evolutionary Synthesis9 (EES), retains the fundaments of evolutionary theory, but differs in its emphasis on the role of constructive processes in development and evolution, and reciprocal portrayals of causation. In the EES, developmental processes, operating through developmental bias, inclusive inheritance and niche construction, share responsibility for the direction and rate of evolution, the origin of character variation and organism–environment complementarity. We spell out the structure, core assumptions and novel predictions of the EES, and show how it can be deployed to stimulate and advance research in those fields that study or use evolutionary biology.
Kim Sterelny - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the extended evolutionary Synthesis its structure assumptions and predictions
Proceedings of The Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2015Co-Authors: Kevin N Laland, Eva Jablonka, Gerd B Muller, Tobias Uller, Marcus W Feldman, Kim Sterelny, Armin P Moczek, John OdlingsmeeAbstract:Scientific activities take place within the structured sets of ideas and assumptions that define a field and its practices. The conceptual framework of evolutionary biology emerged with the Modern Synthesis in the early twentieth century and has since expanded into a highly successful research program to explore the processes of diversification and adaptation. Nonetheless, the ability of that framework satisfactorily to accommodate the rapid advances in developmental biology, genomics and ecology has been questioned. We review some of these arguments, focusing on literatures (evo-devo, developmental plasticity, inclusive inheritance and niche construction) whose implications for evolution can be interpreted in two ways—one that preserves the internal structure of contemporary evolutionary theory and one that points towards an alternative conceptual framework. The latter, which we label the ‘extended evolutionary Synthesis9 (EES), retains the fundaments of evolutionary theory, but differs in its emphasis on the role of constructive processes in development and evolution, and reciprocal portrayals of causation. In the EES, developmental processes, operating through developmental bias, inclusive inheritance and niche construction, share responsibility for the direction and rate of evolution, the origin of character variation and organism–environment complementarity. We spell out the structure, core assumptions and novel predictions of the EES, and show how it can be deployed to stimulate and advance research in those fields that study or use evolutionary biology.
Tobias Uller - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the extended evolutionary Synthesis its structure assumptions and predictions
Proceedings of The Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2015Co-Authors: Kevin N Laland, Eva Jablonka, Gerd B Muller, Tobias Uller, Marcus W Feldman, Kim Sterelny, Armin P Moczek, John OdlingsmeeAbstract:Scientific activities take place within the structured sets of ideas and assumptions that define a field and its practices. The conceptual framework of evolutionary biology emerged with the Modern Synthesis in the early twentieth century and has since expanded into a highly successful research program to explore the processes of diversification and adaptation. Nonetheless, the ability of that framework satisfactorily to accommodate the rapid advances in developmental biology, genomics and ecology has been questioned. We review some of these arguments, focusing on literatures (evo-devo, developmental plasticity, inclusive inheritance and niche construction) whose implications for evolution can be interpreted in two ways—one that preserves the internal structure of contemporary evolutionary theory and one that points towards an alternative conceptual framework. The latter, which we label the ‘extended evolutionary Synthesis9 (EES), retains the fundaments of evolutionary theory, but differs in its emphasis on the role of constructive processes in development and evolution, and reciprocal portrayals of causation. In the EES, developmental processes, operating through developmental bias, inclusive inheritance and niche construction, share responsibility for the direction and rate of evolution, the origin of character variation and organism–environment complementarity. We spell out the structure, core assumptions and novel predictions of the EES, and show how it can be deployed to stimulate and advance research in those fields that study or use evolutionary biology.
Melinda A Zeder - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
why evolutionary biology needs anthropology evaluating core assumptions of the extended evolutionary Synthesis
Evolutionary Anthropology, 2018Co-Authors: Melinda A ZederAbstract:Anthropologists have a long history of applying concepts from evolutionary biology to cultural evolution. Evolutionary biologists, however, have been slow to turn to anthropology for insights about evolution. Recently, evolutionary biology has been engaged in a debate over the need to revise evolutionary theory to account for developments made in 60 years since the Modern Synthesis, the standard evolutionary paradigm, was framed. Revision proponents maintain these developments challenge central tenets of standard theory that can only be accounted for in an extended evolutionary Synthesis (EES). Anthropology has much to offer to this debate. One important transition in human cultural evolution, the domestication of plants and animals, provides an ideal model system assessing core EES assumptions about directionality, causality, targets of selection, modes of inheritance, and pace of evolution. In so doing, anthropologists contribute to an overarching framework that brings together cultural and biological evolution.
Todd H Oakley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the new biology beyond the Modern Synthesis
Biology Direct, 2007Co-Authors: Michael R Rose, Todd H OakleyAbstract:Background: The last third of the 20th Century featured an accumulation of research findings that severely challenged the assumptions of the "Modern Synthesis" which provided the foundations for most biological research during that century. The foundations of that "Modernist" biology had thus largely crumbled by the start of the 21st Century. This in turn raises the question of foundations for biology in the 21st Century. Conclusion: Like the physical sciences in the first half of the 20th Century, biology at the start of the 21st Century is achieving a substantive maturity of theory, experimental tools, and fundamental findings thanks to relatively secure foundations in genomics. Genomics has also forced biologists to connect evolutionary and molecular biology, because these formerly Balkanized disciplines have been brought together as actors on the genomic stage. Biologists are now addressing the evolution of genetic systems using more than the concepts of population biology alone, and the problems of cell biology using more than the tools of biochemistry and molecular biology alone. It is becoming increasingly clear that solutions to such basic problems as aging, sex, development, and genome size potentially involve elements of biological science at every level of organization, from molecule to population. The new biology knits together genomics, bioinformatics, evolutionary genetics, and other such general-purpose tools to supply novel explanations for the paradoxes that undermined Modernist biology. Open Peer Reviewers: This article was reviewed by W.F. Doolittle, E.V. Koonin, and J.M. Logsdon. For the full reviews, please go to the Reviewers' Comments section.
