Literature DB >> 11478524

Developmental drive: an important determinant of the direction of phenotypic evolution.

W Arthur1.   

Abstract

Over any period of evolutionary time, the prevailing ontogenetic trajectory within a lineage may either recur unchanged from generation to generation (stasis) or alter (developmental reprogramming). A key question about reprogramming is whether it exhibits intrinsic biases in favor of some sorts of change and against others, which may be referred to respectively as "drive" and "constraint." A simple logical argument suggests that both drive and constraint should be common, and conversely that cases of equiprobable modification in various phenotypic directions should be relatively rare. These proposals, that drive and constraint exist and that they are common, appear to be widely accepted, even among neo-Darwinians, who are sometimes portrayed as rejecting them. What is more controversial is that developmental drive (and constraint) can have a powerful influence on the direction of evolutionary change. It is argued that such an influence will occur, and indeed may be pervasive.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11478524     DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-142x.2001.003004271.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Evol Dev        ISSN: 1520-541X            Impact factor:   1.930


  16 in total

1.  Mutation-biased adaptation in Andean house wrens.

Authors:  Arlin Stoltzfus; David M McCandlish
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-10-21       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  Origin of the fittest: link between emergent variation and evolutionary change as a critical question in evolutionary biology.

Authors:  Alexander V Badyaev
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 5.349

Review 3.  Developmental constraints on behavioural flexibility.

Authors:  Kay E Holekamp; Eli M Swanson; Page E Van Meter
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2013-04-08       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Patterns of skeletal integration in birds reveal that adaptation of element shapes enables coordinated evolution between anatomical modules.

Authors:  Andrew Orkney; Alex Bjarnason; Brigit C Tronrud; Roger B J Benson
Journal:  Nat Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-07-19       Impact factor: 15.460

5.  A release from developmental bias accelerates morphological diversification in butterfly eyespots.

Authors:  Oskar Brattström; Kwaku Aduse-Poku; Erik van Bergen; Vernon French; Paul M Brakefield
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-10-22       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 6.  Accessibility, constraint, and repetition in adaptive floral evolution.

Authors:  Carolyn A Wessinger; Lena C Hileman
Journal:  Dev Biol       Date:  2016-05-03       Impact factor: 3.582

7.  Conservation and co-option in developmental programmes: the importance of homology relationships.

Authors:  Matthias Sanetra; Gerrit Begemann; May-Britt Becker; Axel Meyer
Journal:  Front Zool       Date:  2005-10-10       Impact factor: 3.172

8.  In silico evolution of gene cooption in pattern-forming gene networks.

Authors:  Alexander V Spirov; Marat A Sabirov; David M Holloway
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2012-12-25

9.  On the relationship between the macroevolutionary trajectories of morphological integration and morphological disparity.

Authors:  Sylvain Gerber
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-05-17       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Differences in the selection response of serially repeated color pattern characters: standing variation, development, and evolution.

Authors:  Cerisse E Allen; Patrícia Beldade; Bas J Zwaan; Paul M Brakefield
Journal:  BMC Evol Biol       Date:  2008-03-26       Impact factor: 3.260

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.