Towards an Evolutionary Biosemiotics: Semiotic Selection and Semiotic Co-option

Abstract

In biosemiotics, living beings are not conceived of as the passive result of anonymous selection pressures acted upon through the course of evolution. Rather, organisms are considered active participants that influence, shape and re-shape other organisms, the surrounding environment, and eventually also their own constitutional and functional integrity. The traditional Darwinian division between natural and sexual selection seems insufficient to encompass the richness of these processes, particularly in light of recent knowledge on communicational processes in the realm of life. Here, we introduce the concepts of semiotic selection and semiotic co-option which in part represent a reinterpretation of classical biological terms and, at the same time, keep explanations sensitive to semiosic processes taking place in living nature. We introduce the term 'semiotic selection' to emphasize the fact that actions of different semiotic subjects (selectors) will produce qualitatively different selection pressures. Thereafter, 'semiotic co-option' explains how semiotic selection may shape appearance in animals through remodelling existing forms and relations. Considering the event of co-option followed by the process of semiotic selection enables us to describe the evolution of semantic organs.Evolutionary topics are central for contemporary biology. And yet, the role of organisms as living subjects in evolution is generally neglected. Biological organisms are rather considered only as being subjected to physical or anonymous

Comprehending the Semiosis of Evolution

“…In particular, recognition and categorization of objects, learning, and communication (both intraspecific and interspecific) can change the evolutionary fate of lineages. Semiotic selection, an effect of choice upon other species (Maran and Kleisner 2010), active habitat preference (Lindholm 2015), making use of and reinterpreting earlier semiotic structures – known as semiotic co-option (Kleisner 2015), and semiotic scaffolding (Hoffmeyer 2015; Kull 2015), are some further means by which semiosis makes evolution happen.…”

Re-semblance and re-evolution: Paramorphism and semiotic co-option may explain the re-evolution of similar phenotypes

“…Therefore, I suggest that explanations of resemblances as they appear within living beings should be approached from at least three perspectives: internalist, externalist and biosemiotic (or interpretative) which takes Umwelt-specific interpretations into account as a force of causation (Uexküll 1921;Portmann 1960;Maran 2007Maran , 2003Kleisner 2008b). Any phenotypic structure could be semiotically co-opted, acquiring specific meaning in the Umwelt of a particular species of organisms, and then further selected and shaped within the constraints given by the properties of the receiver's Umwelt (see Maran, Kleisner 2010).…”

Ecosemiotics: main principles and current developments

“…An example of such change at ecological level would be niche construction in different animals (odling-Smee 1988), for instance, beaver dams by which the animals conduct a largescale re-modelling of the surrounding environment. Biological mimicry would be an instance of evolutionary effect, in which the receiving organism alters through its selective action the features of the perceived organisms as a result of a recognition error or indistinguishability of objects due to the limitations in perception or categorization (see semiotic selection hypothesis; Maran and Kleisner 2010). This process can be exemplified by the emergence of ant-like body forms, behaviours, and chemical communication in numerous myrmecomorphic insects (McIver and Stonedahl 1993;Kleisner and Markoš 2005).…”