Arlin Stoltzfus

Bias in the introduction of variation as an orienting factor in evolution

SUMMARY According to New Synthesis doctrine, the direction of evolution is determined by selection and not by “internal causes” that act by way of propensities of variation. This doctrine rests on the theoretical claim that because mutation rates are small in comparison to selection coefficients, mutation is powerless to overcome opposing selection. Using a simple population‐genetic model, this claim is shown to depend on assuming the prior availability of variation, so that mutation may act only as a “pressure” on the frequencies of existing alleles, and not as the evolutionary process that introduces novelty. As shown here, mutational bias in the introduction of novelty can strongly influence the course of evolution, even when mutation rates are small in comparison to selection coefficients. Recognizing this mode of causation provides a distinct mechanistic basis for an “internalist” approach to determining the contribution of mutational and developmental factors to evolutionary phenomena such as homoplasy, parallelism, and directionality.

Modeling Evolution Using the Probability of Fixation: History and Implications

Many models of evolution calculate the rate of evolution by multiplying the rate at which new mutations originate within a population by a probability of fixation. Here we review the historical origins, contemporary applications, and evolutionary implications of these “origin-fixation” models, which are widely used in evolutionary genetics, molecular evolution, and phylogenetics. Origin-fixation models were first introduced in 1969, in association with an emerging view of “molecular” evolution. Early origin-fixation models were used to calculate an instantaneous rate of evolution across a large number of independently evolving loci; in the 1980s and 1990s, a second wave of origin-fixation models emerged to address a sequence of fixation events at a single locus. Although origin-fixation models have been applied to a broad array of problems in contemporary evolutionary research, their rise in popularity has not been accompanied by an increased appreciation of their restrictive assumptions or their distinctive implications. We argue that origin-fixation models constitute a coherent theory of mutation-limited evolution that contrasts sharply with theories of evolution that rely on the presence of standing genetic variation. A major unsolved question in evolutionary biology is the degree to which these models provide an accurate approximation of evolution in natural populations.

NeXML: Rich, Extensible, and Verifiable Representation of Comparative Data and Metadata

Abstract In scientific research, integration and synthesis require a common understanding of where data come from, how much they can be trusted, and what they may be used for. To make such an understanding computer-accessible requires standards for exchanging richly annotated data. The challenges of conveying reusable data are particularly acute in regard to evolutionary comparative analysis, which comprises an ever-expanding list of data types, methods, research aims, and subdisciplines. To facilitate interoperability in evolutionary comparative analysis, we present NeXML, an XML standard (inspired by the current standard, NEXUS) that supports exchange of richly annotated comparative data. NeXML defines syntax for operational taxonomic units, character-state matrices, and phylogenetic trees and networks. Documents can be validated unambiguously. Importantly, any data element can be annotated, to an arbitrary degree of richness, using a system that is both flexible and rigorous. We describe how the use of NeXML by the TreeBASE and Phenoscape projects satisfies user needs that cannot be satisfied with other available file formats. By relying on XML Schema Definition, the design of NeXML facilitates the development and deployment of software for processing, transforming, and querying documents. The adoption of NeXML for practical use is facilitated by the availability of (1) an online manual with code samples and a reference to all defined elements and attributes, (2) programming toolkits in most of the languages used commonly in evolutionary informatics, and (3) input–output support in several widely used software applications. An active, open, community-based development process enables future revision and expansion of NeXML.

Mutationism and the dual causation of evolutionary change

SUMMARY The rediscovery of Mendels laws a century ago launched the science that William Bateson called “genetics,” and led to a new view of evolution combining selection, particulate inheritance, and the newly characterized phenomenon of “mutation.” This “mutationist” view clashed with the earlier view of Darwin, and the later “Modern Synthesis,” by allowing discontinuity, and by recognizing mutation (or more properly, mutation‐and‐altered‐development) as a source of creativity, direction, and initiative. By the mid‐20th century, the opposing Modern Synthesis view was a prevailing orthodoxy: under its influence, “evolution” was redefined as “shifting gene frequencies,” that is, the sorting out of pre‐existing variation without new mutations; and the notion that mutation‐and‐altered‐development can exert a predictable influence on the course of evolutionary change was seen as heretical. Nevertheless, mutationist ideas re‐surfaced: the notion of mutational determinants of directionality emerged in molecular evolution by 1962, followed in the 1980s by an interest among evolutionary developmental biologists in a shaping or creative role of developmental propensities of variation, and more recently, a recognition by theoretical evolutionary geneticists of the importance of discontinuity and of new mutations in adaptive dynamics. The synthetic challenge presented by these innovations is to integrate mutation‐and‐altered‐development into a new understanding of the dual causation of evolutionary change—a broader and more predictive understanding that already can lay claim to important empirical and theoretical results—and to develop a research program appropriately emphasizing the emergence of variation as a cause of propensities of evolutionary change.

Constructive neutral evolution: exploring evolutionary theory’s curious disconnect

Constructive neutral evolution (CNE) suggests that neutral evolution may follow a stepwise path to extravagance. Whether or not CNE is common, the mere possibility raises provocative questions about causation: in classical neo-Darwinian thinking, selection is the sole source of creativity and direction, the only force that can cause trends or build complex features. However, much of contemporary evolutionary genetics departs from the conception of evolution underlying neo-Darwinism, resulting in a widening gap between what formal models allow, and what the prevailing view of the causes of evolution suggests. In particular, a mutationist conception of evolution as a 2-step origin-fixation process has been a source of theoretical innovation for 40 years, appearing not only in the Neutral Theory, but also in recent breakthroughs in modeling adaptation (the “mutational landscape” model), and in practical software for sequence analysis. In this conception, mutation is not a source of raw materials, but an agent that introduces novelty, while selection is not an agent that shapes features, but a stochastic sieve. This view, which now lays claim to important theoretical, experimental, and practical results, demands our attention. CNE provides a way to explore its most significant implications about the role of variation in evolution.ReviewersAlex Kondrashov, Eugene Koonin and Johann Peter Gogarten reviewed this article.

Sharing and re-use of phylogenetic trees (and associated data) to facilitate synthesis

BackgroundRecently, various evolution-related journals adopted policies to encourage or require archiving of phylogenetic trees and associated data. Such attention to practices that promote sharing of data reflects rapidly improving information technology, and rapidly expanding potential to use this technology to aggregate and link data from previously published research. Nevertheless, little is known about current practices, or best practices, for publishing trees and associated data so as to promote re-use.FindingsHere we summarize results of an ongoing analysis of current practices for archiving phylogenetic trees and associated data, current practices of re-use, and current barriers to re-use. We find that the technical infrastructure is available to support rudimentary archiving, but the frequency of archiving is low. Currently, most phylogenetic knowledge is not easily re-used due to a lack of archiving, lack of awareness of best practices, and lack of community-wide standards for formatting data, naming entities, and annotating data. Most attempts at data re-use seem to end in disappointment. Nevertheless, we find many positive examples of data re-use, particularly those that involve customized species trees generated by grafting to, and pruning from, a much larger tree.ConclusionsThe technologies and practices that facilitate data re-use can catalyze synthetic and integrative research. However, success will require engagement from various stakeholders including individual scientists who produce or consume shareable data, publishers, policy-makers, technology developers and resource-providers. The critical challenges for facilitating re-use of phylogenetic trees and associated data, we suggest, include: a broader commitment to public archiving; more extensive use of globally meaningful identifiers; development of user-friendly technology for annotating, submitting, searching, and retrieving data and their metadata; and development of a minimum reporting standard (MIAPA) indicating which kinds of data and metadata are most important for a re-useable phylogenetic record.

Initial Implementation of a Comparative Data Analysis Ontology

Comparative analysis is used throughout biology. When entities under comparison (e.g. proteins, genomes, species) are related by descent, evolutionary theory provides a framework that, in principle, allows N-ary comparisons of entities, while controlling for non-independence due to relatedness. Powerful software tools exist for specialized applications of this approach, yet it remains under-utilized in the absence of a unifying informatics infrastructure. A key step in developing such an infrastructure is the definition of a formal ontology. The analysis of use cases and existing formalisms suggests that a significant component of evolutionary analysis involves a core problem of inferring a character history, relying on key concepts: “Operational Taxonomic Units” (OTUs), representing the entities to be compared; “character-state data” representing the observations compared among OTUs; “phylogenetic tree”, representing the historical path of evolution among the entities; and “transitions”, the inferred evolutionary changes in states of characters that account for observations. Using the Web Ontology Language (OWL), we have defined these and other fundamental concepts in a Comparative Data Analysis Ontology (CDAO). CDAO has been evaluated for its ability to represent token data sets and to support simple forms of reasoning. With further development, CDAO will provide a basis for tools (for semantic transformation, data retrieval, validation, integration, etc.) that make it easier for software developers and biomedical researchers to apply evolutionary methods of inference to diverse types of data, so as to integrate this powerful framework for reasoning into their research.

Molecular Evolution: Introns Fall into Place

The evolutionary origin of spliceosomal introns remains elusive. The startling success of a new way of predicting intron sites suggests that the splicing machinery determines where introns are added to genes.

Amino Acid Exchangeability and the Adaptive Code Hypothesis

Since the genetic code first was determined, many have claimed that it is organized adaptively, so as to assign similar codons to similar amino acids. This claim has proved difficult to establish due to the absence of relevant comparative data on alternative primordial codes and of objective measures of amino acid exchangeability. Here we use a recently developed measure of exchangeability to evaluate a null hypothesis and two alternative hypotheses about the adaptiveness of the genetic code. The null hypothesis that there is no tendency for exchangeable amino acids to be assigned to similar codons can be excluded here as expected from earlier work. The first alternative hypothesis is that any such correlation between codon distance and amino acid distance is due to incremental mechanisms of code evolution, and not to adaptation to reduce deleterious effects of future mutations. More specifically, new codon assignments that occur by ambiguity reduction or by codon capture will tend to give rise to correlations, whether due to the condition of amino acid ambiguity, or to the condition of similarity between a new tRNA synthetase (or tRNA) and its parent. The second alternative hypothesis, the adaptive hypothesis, then may be defined as an excess relative to what may be expected given the incremental nature of evolution, reflecting true adaptation for robustness rather than an incidental effect. The results reported here indicate that most of the nonrandomness in the amino acids to codon assignments can be explained by incremental code evolution, with a small residue of orderliness that may reflect code adaptation.

Population Diversity of ORFan Genes in Escherichia coli

The origin and evolution of “ORFans” (suspected genes without known relatives) remain unclear. Here, we take advantage of a unique opportunity to examine the population diversity of thousands of ORFans, based on a collection of 35 complete genomes of isolates of Escherichia coli and Shigella (which is included phylogenetically within E. coli). As expected from previous studies, ORFans are shorter and AT-richer in sequence than non-ORFans. We find that ORFans often are very narrowly distributed: the most common pattern is for an ORFan to be found in only one genome. We compared within-species population diversity of ORFan genes with those of two control groups of non-ORFan genes. Patterns of population variation suggest that most ORFans are not artifacts, but encode real genes whose protein-coding capacity is conserved, reflecting selection against nonsynonymous mutations. Nevertheless, nonsynonymous nucleotide diversity is higher than for non-ORFans, whereas synonymous diversity is roughly the same. In particular, there is a several-fold excess of ORFans in the highest decile of diversity relative to controls, which might be due to weaker purifying selection, positive selection, or a subclass of ORFans that are decaying.