David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Evolution and Development 3 (2):73-83 (2001)
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.
|Keywords||evolution population genetics mutation|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Roberta L. Millstein (2007). Hsp90-Induced Evolution: Adaptationist, Neutralist, and Developmentalist Scenarios. Biological Theory: Integrating Development, Evolution and Cognition 2 (4):376-386.
Hans Joachim Poethke (1988). Sex Ratio Polymorphism: The Impact of Mutation and Drift on Evolution. Acta Biotheoretica 37 (2):121-147.
David M. Buss (2006). The Evolutionary Genetics of Personality: Does Mutation Load Signal Relationship Load? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (4):409-409.
Masatoshi Nei (2007). The New Mutation Theory of Phenotypic Evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104 (30):12335-12242.
Matthew C. Keller & Geoffrey Miller (2006). Resolving the Paradox of Common, Harmful, Heritable Mental Disorders: Which Evolutionary Genetic Models Work Best? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (4):385-404.
Roberta L. Millstein & Robert A. Skipper (2007). Population Genetics. In David L. Hull & Michael Ruse (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology. Cambridge University Press
Andrew Buchanan & Mark A. Bedau, The Flexible Balance of Evolutionary Novelty and Memory in the Face of Environmental Catastrophes.
Arlin Stoltzfus (2006). Mutationism and the Dual Causation of Evolutionary Change. Evolution and Development 8 (3):304-317.
Arlin Stoltzfus & Lev Yampolsky (2009). Climbing Mount Probable: Mutation as a Cause of Non-Randomness in Evolution. Journal of Heredity 100 (5):637-647.
Added to index2009-12-02
Total downloads6 ( #466,728 of 1,907,911 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #462,165 of 1,907,911 )
How can I increase my downloads?