What Evolvability Really Is

Brown, Rachael L.

doi:10.1093/bjps/axt014

Cited by 77 publications

(96 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Young et al [28], as noted by Brown [20], attributes differences in limb diversity between apes and quadrupedal monkeys to the release of an ambiguous developmental constraint. Brown grouped such developmental processes as a causal subset of X, noting the existence of other parameters, inherent to the relevant population, capable of causally influencing the probability of change to a future state.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Brown grouped such developmental processes as a causal subset of X, noting the existence of other parameters, inherent to the relevant population, capable of causally influencing the probability of change to a future state. Unique to Brown [20] and Young et al [28], however, the mechanism of PGC determination directly influences the modification of lineages in the context of descent. In other words, the mechanism of PGC determination is an 'X, ' a variable of utmost relevance that characterizes a piece of the inherent traits of a population and drastically influences its evolvability.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Brown specifically regarded evolvability as an explanandum in evolutionary-developmental biology, thus not an explanation for asymmetrical patterns of clade size (or speciation rates), but instead an observation that requires explanation [20]. Formally E: Pr x, b(f t )…”

Section: Evolvabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…says (for a putative mechanism) that the probability that clade A [with mechanism, X 1 ] would have increased evolvability (L) over time T, in environment B, is > the probability that clade M [with the mechanism, X 2 ] would have increased evolvability (L) over time T in environment B [20].…”

Section: Journal Of Phylogenetics and Evolutionary Biologymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…evolvability) are two different things, and the latter does not always play out to the former. Thus, the question, under the reformulation of evolvability [20], is whether the determinative PGC mechanism can be shown to enhance evolvability in a way that is more than just pinning the concept onto a system, but an increase in disposition.…”

Section: A Biological Example Of Evolvability: Primordial Germ Cell Dmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Linking a Biological Mechanism to Evolvability

Crother¹,

Murray²

2018

J Phylogenetics Evol Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evolvability has become a concept used to explain the common observation of clade asymmetry. However, the concept of evolvability means different things to different workers. Recent work has formalized the concept and we apply the formalized concept to a developmental system (primordial germ cell determination mechanism) that has been proposed to explain clade size disparity. In a simplified view, there are two general primordial germ cell (pgc) determination mechanisms: determinative and induced. The determinative mechanism is associated with species rich clades and the induced mechanism with species poor clades. The formal equations of evolvability provide a theoretical framework under which we can assess the relative influence of pgc determination mechanisms on clade evolvability. We propose that the determinative mechanism has enhanced evolvability in most clades that possess the trait.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evolvabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Journal Of Phylogenetics and Evolutionary Biologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Biological Example Of Evolvability: Primordial Germ Cell Dmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Linking a Biological Mechanism to Evolvability

Crother¹,

Murray²

2018

J Phylogenetics Evol Biol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Morphology, evolution, and the whole organism imperative: Why evolutionary questions need multi‐trait evolutionary quantitative genetics

Auerbach

Savell

Agosto

2023

American Journal of Biological Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since Washburn's New Physical Anthropology, researchers have sought to understand the complexities of morphological evolution among anatomical regions in human and non‐human primates. Researchers continue, however, to preferentially use comparative and functional approaches to examine complex traits, but these methods cannot address questions about evolutionary process and often conflate function with fitness. Moreover, researchers also tend to examine anatomical elements in isolation, which implicitly assumes independent evolution among different body regions. In this paper, we argue that questions asked in primate evolution are best examined using multiple anatomical regions subjected to model‐bound methods built from an understanding of evolutionary quantitative genetics. A nascent but expanding number of studies over the last two decades use this approach, examining morphological integration, evolvability, and selection modeling. To help readers learn how to use these methods, we review fundamentals of evolutionary processes within a quantitative genetic framework, explore the importance of neutral evolutionary theory, and explain the basics of evolutionary quantitative genetics, namely the calculation of evolutionary potential for multiple traits in response to selection. Leveraging these methods, we demonstrate their use to understand non‐independence in possible evolutionary responses across the limbs, limb girdles, and basicranium of humans. Our results show that model‐bound quantitative genetic methods can reveal unexpected genetic covariances among traits that create a novel but measurable understanding of evolutionary complexity among multiple traits. We advocate for evolutionary quantitative genetic methods to be a standard whenever appropriate to keep studies of primate morphological evolution relevant for the next seventy years and beyond.

show abstract

Early usage and meaning of evolvability

Crother

Murray

2019

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evolvability has become an enormously popular concept in evolutionary biology and in machine learning software architecture. While it is claimed that the term was coined in 1988 by Richard Dawkins, it was used as early as 1931 as a characteristic of life by John A. Thomson. We quote and review the earliest uses and definitions of evolvability in biological frameworks up until 1989, which are remarkably few. The meaning changed from simply the “ability to evolve” as a characteristic of life to various versions of including necessary variation to predict whether or not something could evolve to the rate and quality of that evolution. Or, meaning changed from the ability to evolve to the “quality” of the ability to evolve. Since then, evolvability has taken on many definitions as it has exploded in usage.

show abstract

What Evolvability Really Is

Cited by 77 publications

References 34 publications

Linking a Biological Mechanism to Evolvability

Linking a Biological Mechanism to Evolvability

Morphology, evolution, and the whole organism imperative: Why evolutionary questions need multi‐trait evolutionary quantitative genetics

Early usage and meaning of evolvability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About