Microevolution
Part of a series on |
Evolutionary biology |
---|
Microevolution is the change in
Microevolution provides the raw material for macroevolution.[2][3]
Difference from macroevolution
Macroevolution is guided by sorting of interspecific variation ("species selection"[2]), as opposed to sorting of intraspecific variation in microevolution.[3] Species selection may occur as (a) effect-macroevolution, where organism-level traits (aggregate traits) affect speciation and extinction rates, and (b) strict-sense species selection, where species-level traits (e.g. geographical range) affect speciation and extinction rates.[4] Macroevolution does not produce evolutionary novelties, but it determines their proliferation within the clades in which they evolved, and it adds species-level traits as non-organismic factors of sorting to this process.[3]
Four processes
Mutation
Mutations are changes in the
In organisms that use
Mutation can result in several different types of change in DNA sequences; these can either have no effect, alter the product of a gene, or prevent the gene from functioning. Studies in the fly Drosophila melanogaster suggest that if a mutation changes a protein produced by a gene, this will probably be harmful, with about 70 percent of these mutations having damaging effects, and the remainder being either neutral or weakly beneficial.[12] Due to the damaging effects that mutations can have on cells, organisms have evolved mechanisms such as DNA repair to remove mutations.[5] Therefore, the optimal mutation rate for a species is a trade-off between costs of a high mutation rate, such as deleterious mutations, and the metabolic costs of maintaining systems to reduce the mutation rate, such as DNA repair enzymes.[13] Viruses that use RNA as their genetic material have rapid mutation rates,[14] which can be an advantage since these viruses will evolve constantly and rapidly, and thus evade the defensive responses of e.g. the human immune system.[15]
Mutations can involve large sections of DNA becoming duplicated, usually through genetic recombination.[16] These duplications are a major source of raw material for evolving new genes, with tens to hundreds of genes duplicated in animal genomes every million years.[17] Most genes belong to larger families of genes of shared ancestry.[18] Novel genes are produced by several methods, commonly through the duplication and mutation of an ancestral gene, or by recombining parts of different genes to form new combinations with new functions.[19][20]
Here, domains act as modules, each with a particular and independent function, that can be mixed together to produce genes encoding new proteins with novel properties.[21] For example, the human eye uses four genes to make structures that sense light: three for color vision and one for night vision; all four arose from a single ancestral gene.[22] Another advantage of duplicating a gene (or even an entire genome) is that this increases redundancy; this allows one gene in the pair to acquire a new function while the other copy performs the original function.[23][24] Other types of mutation occasionally create new genes from previously noncoding DNA.[25][26]
Selection
Selection is the process by which
It is sometimes valuable to distinguish between naturally occurring selection, natural selection, and selection that is a manifestation of choices made by humans, artificial selection. This distinction is rather diffuse. Natural selection is nevertheless the dominant part of selection.
The natural genetic variation within a population of organisms means that some individuals will survive more successfully than others in their current environment. Factors which affect reproductive success are also important, an issue which Charles Darwin developed in his ideas on sexual selection.
Natural selection acts on the phenotype, or the observable characteristics of an organism, but the genetic (heritable) basis of any phenotype which gives a reproductive advantage will become more common in a population (see allele frequency). Over time, this process can result in adaptations that specialize organisms for particular ecological niches and may eventually result in the speciation (the emergence of new species).
Natural selection is one of the cornerstones of modern
Genetic drift
Genetic drift is the change in the relative frequency in which a gene variant (allele) occurs in a population due to random sampling. That is, the alleles in the offspring in the population are a random sample of those in the parents. And chance has a role in determining whether a given individual survives and reproduces. A population's allele frequency is the fraction or percentage of its gene copies compared to the total number of gene alleles that share a particular form.[28]
Genetic drift is an evolutionary process which leads to changes in allele frequencies over time. It may cause gene variants to disappear completely, and thereby reduce genetic variability. In contrast to natural selection, which makes gene variants more common or less common depending on their reproductive success,[29] the changes due to genetic drift are not driven by environmental or adaptive pressures, and may be beneficial, neutral, or detrimental to reproductive success.
The effect of genetic drift is larger in small populations, and smaller in large populations. Vigorous debates wage among scientists over the relative importance of genetic drift compared with natural selection. Ronald Fisher held the view that genetic drift plays at the most a minor role in evolution, and this remained the dominant view for several decades. In 1968 Motoo Kimura rekindled the debate with his neutral theory of molecular evolution which claims that most of the changes in the genetic material are caused by genetic drift.[30] The predictions of neutral theory, based on genetic drift, do not fit recent data on whole genomes well: these data suggest that the frequencies of neutral alleles change primarily due to selection at linked sites, rather than due to genetic drift by means of sampling error.[31]
Gene flow
Gene flow is the exchange of genes between populations, which are usually of the same species.[32] Examples of gene flow within a species include the migration and then breeding of organisms, or the exchange of pollen. Gene transfer between species includes the formation of hybrid organisms and horizontal gene transfer.
Migration into or out of a population can change allele frequencies, as well as introducing genetic variation into a population. Immigration may add new genetic material to the established gene pool of a population. Conversely, emigration may remove genetic material. As barriers to reproduction between two diverging populations are required for the populations to become new species, gene flow may slow this process by spreading genetic differences between the populations. Gene flow is hindered by mountain ranges, oceans and deserts or even man-made structures such as the Great Wall of China, which has hindered the flow of plant genes.[33]
Depending on how far two species have diverged since their
Hybridization is, however, an important means of speciation in plants, since polyploidy (having more than two copies of each chromosome) is tolerated in plants more readily than in animals.[38][39] Polyploidy is important in hybrids as it allows reproduction, with the two different sets of chromosomes each being able to pair with an identical partner during meiosis.[40] Polyploid hybrids also have more genetic diversity, which allows them to avoid inbreeding depression in small populations.[41]
Gene flow is the transfer of
Migration into or out of a population may be responsible for a marked change in allele frequencies. Immigration may also result in the addition of new genetic variants to the established gene pool of a particular species or population.
There are a number of factors that affect the rate of gene flow between different populations. One of the most significant factors is mobility, as greater mobility of an individual tends to give it greater migratory potential. Animals tend to be more mobile than plants, although pollen and seeds may be carried great distances by animals or wind.
Maintained gene flow between two populations can also lead to a combination of the two gene pools, reducing the genetic variation between the two groups. It is for this reason that gene flow strongly acts against speciation, by recombining the gene pools of the groups, and thus, repairing the developing differences in genetic variation that would have led to full speciation and creation of daughter species.
For example, if a species of grass grows on both sides of a highway, pollen is likely to be transported from one side to the other and vice versa. If this pollen is able to fertilise the plant where it ends up and produce viable offspring, then the alleles in the pollen have effectively been able to move from the population on one side of the highway to the other.
Origin and extended use of the term
Origin
The term microevolution was first used by
- ..The production of form from formlessness in the egg-derived individual, the multiplication of parts and the orderly creation of diversity among them, in an actual evolution, of which anyone may ascertain the facts, but of which no one has dissipated the mystery in any significant measure. This microevolution forms an integral part of the grand evolution problem and lies at the base of it, so that we shall have to understand the minor process before we can thoroughly comprehend the more general one...
However, Leavitt was using the term to describe what we would now call developmental biology; it was not until Russian Entomologist Yuri Filipchenko used the terms "macroevolution" and "microevolution" in 1927 in his German language work, Variabilität und Variation, that it attained its modern usage. The term was later brought into the English-speaking world by Filipchenko's student Theodosius Dobzhansky in his book Genetics and the Origin of Species (1937).[1]
Use in creationism
In
Scientific organizations such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science describe microevolution as small scale change within species, and macroevolution as the formation of new species, but otherwise not being different from microevolution. In macroevolution, an accumulation of microevolutionary changes leads to speciation.[53] The main difference between the two processes is that one occurs within a few generations, whilst the other takes place over thousands of years (i.e. a quantitative difference).[54] Essentially they describe the same process; although evolution beyond the species level results in beginning and ending generations which could not interbreed, the intermediate generations could.
Opponents to creationism argue that changes in the number of chromosomes can be accounted for by intermediate stages in which a single chromosome divides in generational stages, or multiple chromosomes fuse, and cite the chromosome difference between humans and the other great apes as an example.[55] Creationists insist that since the actual divergence between the other great apes and humans was not observed, the evidence is circumstantial.
Describing the fundamental similarity between macro and microevolution in his authoritative textbook "Evolutionary Biology," biologist
One of the most important tenets of the theory forged during the Evolutionary Synthesis of the 1930s and 1940s was that "macroevolutionary" differences among organisms - those that distinguish higher taxa - arise from the accumulation of the same kinds of genetic differences that are found within species. Opponents of this point of view believed that "macroevolution" is qualitatively different from "microevolution" within species, and is based on a totally different kind of genetic and developmental patterning... Genetic studies of species differences have decisively disproved [this] claim. Differences between species in morphology, behavior, and the processes that underlie reproductive isolation all have the same genetic properties as variation within species: they occupy consistent chromosomal positions, they may be polygenic or based on few genes, they may display additive, dominant, or epistatic effects, and they can in some instances be traced to specifiable differences in proteins or DNA nucleotide sequences. The degree of reproductive isolation between populations, whether prezygotic or postzygotic, varies from little or none to complete. Thus, reproductive isolation, like the divergence of any other character, evolves in most cases by the gradual substitution of alleles in populations.
— Douglas Futuyma, "Evolutionary Biology" (1998), pp.477-8[56]
Contrary to the claims of some antievolution proponents, evolution of life forms beyond the species level (i.e. speciation) has indeed been observed and documented by scientists on numerous occasions.[57] In creation science, creationists accepted speciation as occurring within a "created kind" or "baramin", but objected to what they called "third level-macroevolution" of a new genus or higher rank in taxonomy. There is ambiguity in the ideas as to where to draw a line on "species", "created kinds", and what events and lineages fall within the rubric of microevolution or macroevolution.[58]
See also
- Punctuated equilibrium - due to gene flow, major evolutionary changes may be rare
References
- ^ a b Microevolution: What is microevolution?
- ^ PMID 1054846.
- ^ ISSN 0031-0239.
- ISSN 1543-592X.
- ^ S2CID 24155688.
- S2CID 11640993.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - PMID 15207870.
- ISBN 978-0-7167-3520-5.
- PMID 15057282.
- ISBN 978-0-7167-3520-5.
- ISBN 978-0-7167-3520-5.
- PMID 17409186.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - S2CID 36771934.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - PMID 10570172.
- PMID 7041255.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - PMID 19597530.
- ISBN 978-1-4051-1950-4.
- PMID 12083509.
- S2CID 7483470.
- S2CID 33999892.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - PMID 19141283.
- S2CID 12851209.
- S2CID 16791399.
- PMID 15252449.
- PMID 18711447.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - PMID 19797681.
- .
- ISBN 978-0-87893-189-7.
- ISBN 978-0-19-505275-6.
- ISBN 978-0-87893-189-7.
- S2CID 5986211.
- PMID 15140081.
- S2CID 13367320.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - PMID 1107543.
- PMID 15618301.
- S2CID 26683922.
- S2CID 11657663.
- S2CID 14856314.
- PMID 18006297.
- S2CID 3329282.
- PMID 10860970.
- PMID 14616063.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - PMID 16942901.
- PMID 12386340.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - PMID 1822285.
- S2CID 11862013.)
{{cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link - PMID 10438861.
- PMID 17187354.
- S2CID 84038011.
- )
- ^ "Young Earth Creationism". National Center for Science Education. 17 October 2008. Retrieved 18 May 2012.
- ^ "Old Earth Creationism". National Center for Science Education. 17 October 2008. Retrieved 18 May 2012.
- ^ [1] Archived 26 January 2012 at the Wayback Machine, p. 12. American Association for the Advancement of Science
- ^ Claim CB902: "Microevolution is distinct from macroevolution", TalkOrigins Archive
- ^ "Human and Ape Chromosomes". Archived from the original on 23 July 2011. Retrieved 29 July 2006.
- ^ Futuyma, Douglas (1998). Evolutionary Biology. Sinauer Associates.
- ^ Complete sourced list of observed instances of speciation, TalkOrigins Archive
- ^ Awbrey, Frank T. (1981). "Defining "Kinds" – Do Creationists Apply a Double Standard?". National Center for Science Education.
External links
- Microevolution (UC Berkeley)
- Microevolution vs Macroevolution Archived 18 August 2011 at the Wayback Machine