Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

Evolution, Natural Selection, Medicine, Psychology & Neuroscience.

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

#1  Postby Olmosis » Dec 11, 2016 11:35 pm

http://www.theatlantic.com/science/arch ... on/508712/

The Biologists Who Want to Overhaul Evolution

A half-century’s worth of scientific discoveries since the last major update to evolutionary theory has some researchers pushing for a paradigm shift.

...
Olmosis
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 8

Slovenia (si)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

#2  Postby Shrunk » Dec 11, 2016 11:40 pm

tl;dr version: No.
"A community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment than it is by the occasional occurrence of crime." -Oscar Wilde
User avatar
Shrunk
 
Posts: 26061
Age: 52
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

#3  Postby Shrunk » Dec 11, 2016 11:41 pm

(Not to say Zimmer's article is not worth reading.)
"A community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment than it is by the occasional occurrence of crime." -Oscar Wilde
User avatar
Shrunk
 
Posts: 26061
Age: 52
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

#4  Postby Olmosis » Dec 11, 2016 11:58 pm

Would you say the non-natural selection elements of evolution are not important enough to warrant it?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-a-s ... 69524.html

In combination, cytogenetics and molecular genetics have taught us about many processes that lead to biological novelties “independently of natural selection” — hybridization, genome duplication, symbiogenesis, chromosome restructuring, horizontal DNA transfer, mobile genetic elements, epigenetic switches, and natural genetic engineering (the ability of all cells to cut, splice, copy, and modify their DNA in non-random ways). As previous blogs document and as future blogs will discuss, the genome sequence record tells us that these processes have accompanied rapid changes in all kinds of organisms. We know that many of them are activated by stress under extraordinary circumstances.


http://natureinstitute.org/txt/st/org/c ... ogy_30.htm

Can Darwinian Evolutionary Theory Be Taken Seriously?

by Stephen L. Talbott

...


http://www.thethirdwayofevolution.com/

Neo-Darwinism ignores important rapid evolutionary processes such as symbiogenesis, horizontal DNA transfer, action of mobile DNA and epigenetic modifications. Moreover, some Neo-Darwinists have elevated Natural Selection into a unique creative force that solves all the difficult evolutionary problems without a real empirical basis. Many scientists today see the need for a deeper and more complete exploration of all aspects of the evolutionary process.
Olmosis
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 8

Slovenia (si)
Print view this post

Re: Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

#5  Postby Shrunk » Dec 12, 2016 12:06 am

Olmosis wrote:Would you say the non-natural selection elements of evolution are not important enough to warrant it?


No. Non-natural selection elements have already been incorporated into modern evolutionary theory for decades now. That's the point.

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... y-biology/

https://sandwalk.blogspot.ca/2016/12/ke ... ution.html
"A community is infinitely more brutalised by the habitual employment of punishment than it is by the occasional occurrence of crime." -Oscar Wilde
User avatar
Shrunk
 
Posts: 26061
Age: 52
Male

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

#6  Postby Calilasseia » Dec 12, 2016 6:16 am

Olmosis wrote:Would you say the non-natural selection elements of evolution are not important enough to warrant it?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-a-s ... 69524.html

In combination, cytogenetics and molecular genetics have taught us about many processes that lead to biological novelties “independently of natural selection” — hybridization, genome duplication, symbiogenesis, chromosome restructuring, horizontal DNA transfer, mobile genetic elements, epigenetic switches, and natural genetic engineering (the ability of all cells to cut, splice, copy, and modify their DNA in non-random ways). As previous blogs document and as future blogs will discuss, the genome sequence record tells us that these processes have accompanied rapid changes in all kinds of organisms. We know that many of them are activated by stress under extraordinary circumstances.


http://natureinstitute.org/txt/st/org/c ... ogy_30.htm

Can Darwinian Evolutionary Theory Be Taken Seriously?

by Stephen L. Talbott

...


http://www.thethirdwayofevolution.com/

Neo-Darwinism ignores important rapid evolutionary processes such as symbiogenesis, horizontal DNA transfer, action of mobile DNA and epigenetic modifications. Moreover, some Neo-Darwinists have elevated Natural Selection into a unique creative force that solves all the difficult evolutionary problems without a real empirical basis. Many scientists today see the need for a deeper and more complete exploration of all aspects of the evolutionary process.


You do realise neutral theory has been an integral part of evolutionary theory since the 1980s?
Signature temporarily on hold until I can find a reliable image host ...
User avatar
Calilasseia
Moderator
 
Posts: 21139
Age: 55
Male

Country: England
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

#7  Postby Rumraket » Dec 12, 2016 8:22 am

Didn't Kimura publish on neutral theory already back in 69?
"Nullius in verba" - Take nobody's word for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullius_in_verba
User avatar
Rumraket
 
Posts: 12641
Age: 37
Male

Denmark (dk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

#8  Postby WayOfTheDodo » Dec 12, 2016 10:50 am

Shrunk wrote:tl;dr version: No.


Betteridge's law of headlines strikes again.
User avatar
WayOfTheDodo
 
Name: Raphus Cucullatus
Posts: 1881

Mauritius (mu)
Print view this post

Re: Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

#9  Postby Calilasseia » Dec 18, 2016 9:22 pm

Rumraket wrote:Didn't Kimura publish on neutral theory already back in 69?


His first major paper on neutral theory was written in 1968, but it was the developments in molecular biology in the 1980s that allowed direct empirical tests to be performed, and Kimura himself was instrumental in alighting upon the key molecular test allowing discrimination between positive selection, drift and purifying selection to be made. His paper on DNA and neutral theory in Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B in 1986 was a landmark paper in the field. His co-worker Tomoko Ohta also made numerous important contributions, in particular with regard to the analysis of the interaction of selection and drift in gene systems with multiple components and feedback loops. Another landmark paper was this one in Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA in 1978.
Signature temporarily on hold until I can find a reliable image host ...
User avatar
Calilasseia
Moderator
 
Posts: 21139
Age: 55
Male

Country: England
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Is the Modern Synthesis of Evolution in need of an update?

#10  Postby Rumraket » Dec 18, 2016 10:25 pm

Alright that does make sense. One does not establish a consensus view in a scientific field the very moment one publishes a paper on it. It would take time for the ideas to be disseminated by the wider scientific community.
"Nullius in verba" - Take nobody's word for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nullius_in_verba
User avatar
Rumraket
 
Posts: 12641
Age: 37
Male

Denmark (dk)
Print view this post


Return to Biological Sciences

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest