DOCSLIB.ORG

Molecular Evolution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Molecular Evolution Molecular evolution Jim Watson, Francis Crick, and DNA Molecular Evolution 4 characteristics 1. c-value paradox 2. Molecular evolution is sometimes decoupled from morphological evolution 3. Molecular clock 4. Neutral theory of Evolution Molecular Evolution 1. c-value paradox Kb Navicola (diatom) 35,000 Drosophila (fruitfly) 180,000 Gallus (chicken) 1,200,000 Cyprinus (carp) 1,700,000 Boa (snake) 2,100,000 Rattus (rat) 2,900,000 Homo (human) 3,400,000 Schistocerca (locust) 9,300,000 Allium (onion) 18,000,000 Lilium (lily) 36,000,000 Ophioglossum (fern) 160,000,000 Amoeba (amoeba) 290,000,000 Molecular Evolution 4 characteristics 1. c-value paradox 2. Molecular evolution is sometimes decoupled from morphological evolution 3. Molecular clock 4. Neutral theory of Evolution Molecular Evolution 2. Molecular evolution is sometimes decoupled from morphological evolution Morphological Genetic Similarity Similarity 1. low low 2. high high 3. high low 4. low high Molecular Evolution Morphological Genetic Similarity Similarity 3. high low Living fossils Latimeria, Coelacanth Limulus, Horseshoe crab Molecular Evolution Morphological Genetic Similarity Similarity - distance between humans and chimpanzees is less than 4. low high between sibling species of Drosophila. - for example, from a sample of 11 proteins representing 1271 amino acids, only 5 differ between humans and chimps. - the other six proteins are identical in primary structure. - most proteins that have been sequenced exhibit no amino acid differences - e.g., alphaglobin Pan, Chimp Homo, Human Molecular Evolution 4 characteristics 1. c-value paradox 2. Molecular evolution is sometimes decoupled from morphological evolution 3. Molecular clock 4. Neutral theory of Evolution 2. The molecular clock • first reported by Zuckerkandl and Pauling in 1962. 2. The molecular clock • first reported by Zuckerkandl and Pauling in 1962. Method: 1. Obtain homologous amino acid sequences from a group of taxa. 2. Estimate divergence times (from the fossil record) 3. Assess relationship between protein divergence and evolutionary time. The molecular clock No. of amino α-globin gene in acid substitutions vertebrates 100 200 300 400 500 Time (millions of years) The molecular clock ticks at different rates for synonymous and nonsynonymous mutations Molecular clock - when the rates of silent substitution at a gene are compared to its rate of replacement substitution, the former typically exceeds the latter by a factor of 5-10. Conclusion: the majority of evolution involves the substitution of silent mutations – likely by random drift. - these observations led to the proposal of the neutral theory of molecular evolution in 1968 by Motoo Kimura. “the survival of the luckiest” Motoo Kimura 1924-1994 Molecular Evolution 4 characteristics 1. c-value paradox 2. Molecular evolution is sometimes decoupled from morphological evolution 3. Molecular clock 4. Neutral theory of Evolution The neutral theory of molecular evolution 1. most mutations are harmful and thus removed by “negative” (or “purifying”) natural selection. 2. some mutations are neutral and thus accumulate in natural populations by random genetic drift. 3. very rarely, beneficial mutations occur and are fixed by “positive” Natural selection. 4. The rate of evolution of a molecule is determined by its degree of “functional constraint”. The neutral theory of molecular evolution 5. neutral mutations and random genetic drift are responsible for virtually all molecular evolution. - this theory gave rise to a bitter dispute known as the neutralist- selectionist controversy. - the controversy raged throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s and has not been satisfactorily resolved. - the essence of this controversy is not whether natural selection or random genetic drift operate at the molecular level, but rather what is the relative importance of each. - Testing the validity of the neutral theory has been very difficult. “Classical” versus “balanced” views of genome structure • controversy began in the 1920’s with the establishment of two schools of genetics. • the “Naturalists” studied natural populations (e.g. Dobzhansky, Mayr). • the “Mendelians” studied genetics exclusively in the laboratory (e.g., Morgan, Sturtevant, Muller). Classical Balanced + + - + + + A1 B2 C1 D4 E3 F6 + + + + + + A3 B2 C4 D5 E5 - Most loci homozygous Most loci heterozygous for “wild type” alleles Polymorphism rare Polymorphism common + = “wild type” allele - = deleterious recessive allele Why is this distinction important? Classical Balanced Speciation Difficult Easy (mutation- (opportunity- limited) limited) Selection Purifying Balancing Population Inter > Intra Intra > Inter variation Polymorphism transient balanced (short-lived) (long-lived) Allozyme electrophoresis setup Starch gel stained for Phosphoglucomutase (Pgm) Extensive allozyme variation exists in nature Vertebrates (648 species) Extensive allozyme variation exists in nature… …so this confirms the balanced view? Vertebrates (648 species) NO! MOST POLYMORPHISMS MAY BE NEUTRAL! The neutral theory of molecular evolution • first proposed by Motoo Kimura in 1968. The neutral theory of molecular evolution • first proposed by Motoo Kimura in 1968. • two observations led Kimura to develop neutral theory: 1. “Excessive” amounts of protein (allozyme) polymorphism • this would impart a severe "segregational load" if adaptive. Example: sickle cell anemia A A A S S S Genotype Hb Hb Hb Hb Hb Hb Fitness 1-s 1 1-t s=0.12 t=0.86 Segregational load = st/(s + t) = 0.11 • this means that 11% of the population dies every generation because of this polymorphism! Kimura argued that the molecular clock reflects the action of random drift, not selection! No. of amino α-globin gene in acid substitutions vertebrates 100 200 300 400 500 Time (millions of years) Main features of the neutral theory 1. The rate of protein evolution is roughly constant per site per year. - this is the "molecular clock" hypothesis. - why per site PER YEAR, not per site PER GENERATION? 2. Rate of substitution of neutral alleles equals the mutation rate to neutral alleles. • let µ = neutral mutation rate at a locus. • the rate of appearance of a neutral allele = 2Nµ. • the frequency of the new neutral allele = 1/2N. • this frequency represents the allele’s probability of fixation. 2. Rate of substitution of neutral alleles equals the mutation rate to neutral alleles. Rate of evolution = rate of appearance x probability of fixation = 2Nµ x 1/2N = µ • this rate is unaffected by population size! 3. Heterozygosity (H) levels are determined by the “neutral parameter”, 4Neµ. H = 4Neµ/(4Neµ + 1) 4. Rates of protein evolution vary with degree of selective constraint. • “selective constraint” represents the ability of a protein to “tolerate” random mutations. • for highly constrained molecules, most mutations are deleterious and few are neutral. • for weakly constrained molecules, more mutations are neutral and few are deleterious. Degree of constraint dictates rate of evolution α-globin No. of amino acid substitions histone H4 100 200 300 400 500 Time (millions of years) high constraint → low µ → low H, slow rate of evolution low constraint → high µ → high H, fast rate of evolution Testing the neutral theory by studying DNA sequences 1. Comparisons of polymorphism and divergence • studying DNA sequences enables the comparison of replacement and silent mutations! N A E R T R D. melanogaster AAT GCG GAA CGG ACT CGT --C --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- T-- --- D. simulans --- --C -T- --- --- --C --- --- -T- --- --- --C --- --- -T- --- --- --C N A E R T R D. melanogaster AAT GCG GAA CGG ACT CGT --C --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- T-- --- D. simulans --- --C -T- --- --- --C --- --- -T- --- --- --C --- --- -T- --- --- --C Mutations are either: 1. fixed between species 2. polymorphic within species Mutations are also either: 1. silent 2. replacement Polymorphic Fixed Replacement a c Silent b d • the degree of selective constraint determines the ratio of a:b and c:d. • however, because polymorphism is a transient phase of molecular evolution, the neutral theory predicts that ratio a:b = ratio c:d ↑ ↑ short term evolution = long term evolution This is the McDonald-Kreitman test Two examples: 1. The alcohol dehydrogenase (Adh) locus in Drosophila melanogaster, D. yakuba and D. simulans polymorphic fixed replacement 2 7 silent 42 17 G = 7.43, P < 0.001 Conclusion: too many fixed replacements! Two examples: 2. The glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6pdh) locus in D. melanogaster and D. simulans. polymorphic fixed replacement 2 21 silent 36 26 G = 19.0, P < 0.0001 Conclusion: too many fixed replacements! 2. Tests for positive selection • positive selection occurs when the rate of replacement substitution exceeds the rate of silent substitution. • although rare, is widely documented at two broad classes of genes: 1. Genes involved in host-pathogen interactions • notably the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) and pathogen surface coat proteins. 2. Genes functioning in reproduction • notably seminal fluid proteins and surface proteins on sperm and egg. The use of outlier loci top identify selection Wright's Fixation index F statistics 1 . Fst = 4Nm + 1 N = population size m = migration rate Nm = number of migrants per generation The use of outlier loci top identify selection Fst average value loci under loci under directional balancing selection selection Conclusion: Natural selection may be more important in directing molecular evolution than previously believed! Nearly Neutral Theory of Evolution Tomoko Ohta .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Comparative Evolution: Latent Potentials for Anagenetic Advance (Adaptive Shifts/Constraints/Anagenesis) G
    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 85, pp. 5141-5145, July 1988 Evolution Comparative evolution: Latent potentials for anagenetic advance (adaptive shifts/constraints/anagenesis) G. LEDYARD STEBBINS* AND DANIEL L. HARTLtt *Department of Genetics, University of California, Davis, CA 95616; and tDepartment of Genetics, Washington University School of Medicine, Box 8031, 660 South Euclid Avenue, Saint Louis, MO 63110 Contributed by G. Ledyard Stebbins, April 4, 1988 ABSTRACT One of the principles that has emerged from genetic variation available for evolutionary changes (2), a experimental evolutionary studies of microorganisms is that major concern of modem evolutionists is explaining how the polymorphic alleles or new mutations can sometimes possess a vast amount of genetic variation that actually exists can be latent potential to respond to selection in different environ- maintained. Given the fact that in complex higher organisms ments, although the alleles may be functionally equivalent or most new mutations with visible effects on phenotype are disfavored under typical conditions. We suggest that such deleterious, many biologists, particularly Kimura (3), have responses to selection in microorganisms serve as experimental sought to solve the problem by proposing that much genetic models of evolutionary advances that occur over much longer variation is selectively neutral or nearly so, at least at the periods of time in higher organisms. We propose as a general molecular level. Amidst a background of what may be largely evolutionary principle that anagenic advances often come from neutral or nearly neutral genetic variation, adaptive evolution capitalizing on preexisting latent selection potentials in the nevertheless occurs. While much of natural selection at the presence of novel ecological opportunity.
    [Show full text]
  • Microevolution and the Genetics of Populations ​ ​ Microevolution Refers to Varieties Within a Given Type
    Chapter 8: Evolution Lesson 8.3: Microevolution and the Genetics of Populations ​ ​ Microevolution refers to varieties within a given type. Change happens within a group, but the descendant is clearly of the same type as the ancestor. This might better be called variation, or adaptation, but the changes are "horizontal" in effect, not "vertical." Such changes might be accomplished by "natural selection," in which a trait ​ ​ ​ ​ within the present variety is selected as the best for a given set of conditions, or accomplished by "artificial selection," such as when dog breeders produce a new breed of dog. Lesson Objectives ● Distinguish what is microevolution and how it affects changes in populations. ● Define gene pool, and explain how to calculate allele frequencies. ● State the Hardy-Weinberg theorem ● Identify the five forces of evolution. Vocabulary ● adaptive radiation ● gene pool ● migration ● allele frequency ● genetic drift ● mutation ● artificial selection ● Hardy-Weinberg theorem ● natural selection ● directional selection ● macroevolution ● population genetics ● disruptive selection ● microevolution ● stabilizing selection ● gene flow Introduction Darwin knew that heritable variations are needed for evolution to occur. However, he knew nothing about Mendel’s laws of genetics. Mendel’s laws were rediscovered in the early 1900s. Only then could scientists fully understand the process of evolution. Microevolution is how individual traits within a population change over time. In order for a population to change, some things must be assumed to be true. In other words, there must be some sort of process happening that causes microevolution. The five ways alleles within a population change over time are natural selection, migration (gene flow), mating, mutations, or genetic drift.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Evolution
    An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info Molecular Evolution An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info Outline • Evolutionary Tree Reconstruction • “Out of Africa” hypothesis • Did we evolve from Neanderthals? • Distance Based Phylogeny • Neighbor Joining Algorithm • Additive Phylogeny • Least Squares Distance Phylogeny • UPGMA • Character Based Phylogeny • Small Parsimony Problem • Fitch and Sankoff Algorithms • Large Parsimony Problem • Evolution of Wings • HIV Evolution • Evolution of Human Repeats An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info Early Evolutionary Studies • Anatomical features were the dominant criteria used to derive evolutionary relationships between species since Darwin till early 1960s • The evolutionary relationships derived from these relatively subjective observations were often inconclusive. Some of them were later proved incorrect An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info Evolution and DNA Analysis: the Giant Panda Riddle • For roughly 100 years scientists were unable to figure out which family the giant panda belongs to • Giant pandas look like bears but have features that are unusual for bears and typical for raccoons, e.g., they do not hibernate • In 1985, Steven O’Brien and colleagues solved the giant panda classification problem using DNA sequences and algorithms An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info Evolutionary Tree of Bears and Raccoons An Introduction to Bioinformatics Algorithms www.bioalgorithms.info Evolutionary Trees: DNA-based Approach • 40 years ago: Emile Zuckerkandl and Linus Pauling brought reconstructing evolutionary relationships with DNA into the spotlight • In the first few years after Zuckerkandl and Pauling proposed using DNA for evolutionary studies, the possibility of reconstructing evolutionary trees by DNA analysis was hotly debated • Now it is a dominant approach to study evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Drift Lab
    Genetic Drift Lab Small population sizes are more strongly influenced by random events than large populations. This means that the genetic frequencies of alleles in small populations are more likely to vary from one generation to the next from the original population. Often, genetic variation is rapidly lost in small populations and random events can create rapid genetic changes or microevolution in such cases. Populations may be subject to this random genetic drift (rapid movement of allele frequencies) by one of two events that reduce population size. 1. Bottlenecks - an incident reduces the overall number of individuals in a population and only a few survive to produce the next generation. Evidence of bottlenecks have been discovered in many species, such as cheetahs and the northern elephant seal. 2. Founder effect - a small number of individuals disperse and colonize new habitat, founding a new population. Organisms colonizing new habitats, such as islands, or migrating to new areas are also common. In both cases the surviving or founding individuals will often vary in genetic frequency from the parental populations (original sources). Also, small subsequent population size plays a big role in additional changes to the gene frequencies. I. Simulation of random events (coin tosses): Each student flips a coin 10 times. What are the expected number of heads for 10 flips? How many heads did you obtain for your 10 flips? _______ # students in your class ___________ # times heads appeared out of 10 trials for all students: 0 _____ 1 ______ 2 _______ 3 ______ 4 ______ 5 ______ 6 _____ 7 _______ 8 ______ 9 ______ 10 ______ How many total times did the replications meet the expected number of heads _______ How many times did the replications not meet this? __________ II.
    [Show full text]
  • Population Genetics
    Population Genetics • Study of the distribution of alleles in populations and causes of allele frequency changes Key Concepts • Diploid individuals carry two alleles at every locus Homozygous: alleles are the same Heterozygous: alleles are different • Evolution: change in allele frequencies from one generation to the next Distinguishing Among Sources of Phenotypic Variation in Populations • Discrete vs. continuous • Genotype or environment (nature vs. nurture) • Phenotypic Plasticity (revisited) Phenotypic variation - Discrete vs. Continuous Polygenic Control can create Continuous Variation Phenotypic Variation - Discrete vs. Continuous Quantitative or Continuous or Metric Variation, very often Polygenic Phenotypic variation - genotype or environment? Phenotypic variation - genotype or environment? Mechanisms of Evolutionary Change – “Microevolutionary Processes” • Mutation: Ultimate natural resource of evolution, occurs at the molecular level in DNA. • Natural Selection: A difference, on average, between the survival or fecundity of individuals with certain arrays of phenotypes as compared to individuals with alternative phenotypes. • Migration: The movement of alleles from one population to another, typically by the movement of individuals or via long-range dispersal of gametes. • Genetic Drift: Change in the frequencies of alleles in a population resulting from chance variation in the survival and/or reproductive success of individuals; results in nonadaptive evolution (e.g., bottlenecks). These combined forces affect changes at the level of individuals, populations, and species. What is Population Genetics? • The study of alleles becoming more or less common over time. • Applied Meiosis: Application of Mendel’s Law of segregation of alleles. • Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium Principle: Acts as a null hypothesis for tracking allele and genotype frequencies in a population in the absence of evolutionary forces.
    [Show full text]
  • 5. EVOLUTION AS a POPULATION-GENETIC PROCESS 5 April 2020
    æ 5. EVOLUTION AS A POPULATION-GENETIC PROCESS 5 April 2020 With knowledge on rates of mutation, recombination, and random genetic drift in hand, we now consider how the magnitudes of these population-genetic features dictate the paths that are open vs. closed to evolutionary exploitation in various phylogenetic lineages. Because historical contingencies exist throughout the Tree of Life, we cannot expect to derive from first principles the source of every molecular detail of cellular diversification. We can, however, use established theory to address more general issues, such as the degree of attainable molecular refinement, rates of transition from one state to another, and the degree to which nonadaptive processes (mutation and random genetic drift) contribute to phylogenetic diversification. Substantial reviews of the field of evolutionary theory appear in Charlesworth and Charlesworth (2010) and Walsh and Lynch (2018). Much of the field is con- cerned with the mechanisms maintaining genetic variation within populations, as this ultimately dictates various aspects of the short-term response to selection. Here, however, we are primarily concerned with long-term patterns of phylogenetic diver- sification, so the focus is on the divergence of mean phenotypes. This still requires some knowledge of the principles of population genetics, as evolutionary divergence is ultimately a consequence of the accrual of genetic modifications at the population level. All evolutionary change initiates as a transient phase of genetic polymor- phism, during which mutant alleles navigate the rough sea of random genetic drift, often being evaluated on various genetic backgrounds, with some paths being more accessible to natural selection than others.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Effects of Genetic Drift and Natural Selection in Drosophila Melanogaster
    Tested Studies for Laboratory Teaching Proceedings of the Association for Biology Laboratory Education Vol. 32, 195-210, 2011 Evaluating the Effects of Genetic Drift and Natural Selection in Drosophila melanogaster Elizabeth Welsh Biology Department, Dalhousie University, 1355 Oxford Street, Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3H 4J1 ([email protected]) This laboratory provides a “hands on” experimental approach to illustrate evolution in a semester-long study us- ing red-eye and white-eye phenotypes of Drosophila melanogaster. Students set up and maintain small and large fly populations for several generations to observe the effects of genetic drift and natural selection. They record the phenotypes, calculate allele frequencies and at the end of the semester, submit a formal laboratory report on this experiment which includes chi-square tests, and graphs of allele frequencies, heterozygosity and Fst values. They gain valuable practical, analytical, and writing experience from this experiment. Keywords: evolution, Drosophila melanogaster, natural selection, evolution, genetic drift, population size, hetero- zygosity Introduction Introduction This laboratory has been adapted from one developed Timing at the University of Toronto (Goldman, C., 1991). It is cur- One thing to consider is that because it is an ongoing se- rently used in the second year Evolution class at Dalhousie mester -long experiment, it does take up a bit of time, and University, which is a required class for all Biology Majors. other labs need to be organized around the fly lab schedule. Drosophila melanogaster has proven to be an ideal organ- Our labs are two hours long. We do an introductory lab dur- ism for an undergraduate laboratory in evolution because it ing which we go over administrative details of the laborato- is relatively easy to maintain and has a short life cycle.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 11 Molecular Evolution
    Lecture 11 Molecular evolution Jim Watson, Francis Crick, and DNA Molecular Evolution 4 characteristics 1. c-value paradox 2. Molecular evolution is sometimes decoupled from morphological evolution 3. Molecular clock 4. Neutral theory of Evolution Molecular Evolution 1. c-value!!!!!! paradox Kb! ! Navicola (diatom) ! !! 35,000! Drosophila (fruitfly) ! !180,000! Gallus (chicken) ! ! 1,200,000! Cyprinus (carp) 1,700,000! Boa (snake) 2,100,000! Rattus (rat) 2,900,000! Homo (human) 3,400,000! Schistocerca (locust) 9,300,000! Allium (onion) 18,000,000! Lilium (lily) 36,000,000! Ophioglossum (fern) 160,000,000! Amoeba (amoeba) 290,000,000! Isochores Cold-blooded vertebrates L (low GC) Warm-blooded vertebrates L H1 L H2 L H3 (low GC) (high GC) Isochores - Chromatin structure - Time of replication - Gene types - Gene concentration - Retroviruses Warm-blooded vertebrates L H1 L H2 L H3 (low GC) (high GC) (Mb) GC, % GC, % Isochores of human chromosome 21 (Macaya et al., 1976) Costantini et al., 2006 Molecular Evolution 2. Molecular evolution is sometimes decoupled from morphological evolution Morphological Genetic Similarity Similarity 1. low low 2. high high 3. high low 4. low high Molecular Evolution Morphological Genetic Similarity Similarity 3. high low Living fossils Latimeria, Coelacanth Limulus, Horseshoe crab Molecular Evolution Morphological Genetic Similarity Similarity - distance between humans and chimpanzees is less than 4. low high between sibling species of Drosophila. - for example, from a sample of 11 proteins representing 1271 amino acids, only 5 differ between humans and chimps. - the other six proteins are identical in primary structure. - most proteins that have been sequenced exhibit no amino acid differences - e.g., alphaglobin Pan, Chimp Homo, Human Molecular clock - when the rates of silent substitution at a gene are compared to its rate of replacement substitution, the former typically exceeds the latter by a factor of 5-10.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Evolution and Phylogenetic Tree Reconstruction
    1 4 Molecular Evolution and 3 2 5 Phylogenetic Tree Reconstruction 1 4 2 3 5 Orthology, Paralogy, Inparalogs, Outparalogs Phylogenetic Trees • Nodes: species • Edges: time of independent evolution • Edge length represents evolution time § AKA genetic distance § Not necessarily chronological time Inferring Phylogenetic Trees Trees can be inferred by several criteria: § Morphology of the organisms • Can lead to mistakes § Sequence comparison Example: Mouse: ACAGTGACGCCCCAAACGT Rat: ACAGTGACGCTACAAACGT Baboon: CCTGTGACGTAACAAACGA Chimp: CCTGTGACGTAGCAAACGA Human: CCTGTGACGTAGCAAACGA Distance Between Two Sequences Basic principle: • Distance proportional to degree of independent sequence evolution Given sequences xi, xj, dij = distance between the two sequences One possible definition: i j dij = fraction f of sites u where x [u] ≠ x [u] Better scores are derived by modeling evolution as a continuous change process Molecular Evolution Modeling sequence substitution: Consider what happens at a position for time Δt, • P(t) = vector of probabilities of {A,C,G,T} at time t • µAC = rate of transition from A to C per unit time • µA = µAC + µAG + µAT rate of transition out of A • pA(t+Δt) = pA(t) – pA(t) µA Δt + pC(t) µCA Δt + pG(t) µGA Δt + pT(t) µTA Δt Molecular Evolution In matrix/vector notation, we get P(t+Δt) = P(t) + Q P(t) Δt where Q is the substitution rate matrix Molecular Evolution • This is a differential equation: P’(t) = Q P(t) • Q => prob. distribution over {A,C,G,T} at each position, stationary (equilibrium) frequencies πA, πC, πG,
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Evolution Charles F
    V.1 Molecular Evolution Charles F. Aquadro OUTLINE could be used to infer the date of a last common ancestor. 1. What is molecular evolution and why does it Molecular Evolution. Changes in the molecules of life occur? (DNA, RNA, and protein) over generations, for many 2. Origins of molecular evolution, the molecular reasons, including mutation, genetic drift, and nat- clock, and the neutral theory ural selection, resulting in different sequences of these 3. Predictions of the neutral theory for variation molecules in different descendant lineages. The study within and between species of molecular evolution is the study of the patterns 4. The impact of natural selection on molecular and process of change that result in these different variation and evolution sequences. 5. Biological insights from the study of molecular Mutation. Heritable change in genetic material, includ- evolution ing base substitutions, insertions, deletions, and re- 6. Conclusions arrangements; the ultimate source of new variation in populations. The molecules of life (DNA, RNA, and proteins) change Neutral Theory. Short for neutral mutation–random drift over evolutionary time. Much can be learned about evo- theory of molecular evolution, proposing that molec- lutionary process and biological function from the rates ular variation is equivalent in function (selectively and patterns of change in these molecules. The study of neutral), making genetic drift the main driver of these changes is the study of molecular evolution. This molecular genetic change in populations over time. chapter discusses why these molecules change, what can Positive Selection. New advantageous mutations, or be learned about pattern and process from these changes, changing environments, can present opportunities and how the changes in the molecules of life can be used for new, or currently existing, variants to now have to infer important past evolutionary events.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Evolution
    Dr. Walter Salzburger Molecular Evolution Herbstsemester 2008 Freitag 13:15 - 15 Uhr 2 Kreditpunkte Structure | i Structure of the course: The Nature of Molecular Evolution Molecules as Documents of Evolutionary History Inferring Molecular Phylogeny! Models of Molecular Evolution The Neutral Theory and Adaptive Evolution Evolutionary Genomics From DNA to Diversity Lectures Papers Lab Structure | ii Lectures: ! The Nature of Molecular Evolution 3.10. ! Molecules as Documents of Evolutionary History 17.10. ! Inferring Molecular Phylogeny!!!!!!!!31.10. ! Models of Molecular Evolution 14.11. ! The Neutral Theory and Adaptive Evolution 5.12. ! Evolutionary Genomics 19.12. ! From DNA to Diversity ?.?. Structure | iii Useful books: Page and Holmes (1998) Molecular Evolution – A Phylogenetic Approach, Blackwell Publishing Nei and Kumar (2000) Molecular Evolution and Phylogenetics; Oxford University Press Avise (2004) Molecular Markers, Natural History, and Evolution; Sinauer Carroll, Grenier and Weatherbee (2005) From DNA to Diversity; Blackwell Structure | iv Examination: + Written Exam Report Goal | v Learning targets: Introduction to the field of Molecular Evolution Key concepts and methods of Molecular Evolution Key players in the field of Molecular Evolution Key papers in Molecular Evolution Milestones in Molecular Evolution Walter Salzburger The Nature of Molecular Evolution A brief history | 1 Molecular evolution deals with the process of evolution at the scale of DNA, RNA and proteins A brief history | 2 Charles R. Darwin publishes “On the origin of species 1859 by means of natural selection” and establishes the theory of evolution Charles R. Darwin (1809-1882) A brief history | 3 Gregor Mendel publishes “Experiments in plant 1866 hybridization”. This paper established what eventually became formalized as the Mendelian laws of inheritance.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary Pluralism and the Ideal of a Unified Biology
    História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos ISSN: 0104-5970 ISSN: 1678-4758 Casa de Oswaldo Cruz, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz Araújo, Leonardo Augusto Luvison; Reis, Claudio Ricardo Martins dos Pluralismo evolutivo e o ideal de unificação da biologia História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, vol. 28, no. 2, 2021, pp. 393-411 Casa de Oswaldo Cruz, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-59702021000200004 Available in: https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=386167870004 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System Redalyc More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America and the Caribbean, Spain and Journal's webpage in redalyc.org Portugal Project academic non-profit, developed under the open access initiative Evolutionary pluralism and the ideal of a unified biology Evolutionary pluralism and the ideal of a unified biology ARAÚJO, Leonardo Augusto Luvison; REIS, Claudio Ricardo Martins dos. Evolutionary pluralism and the ideal of a unified biology.História, Ciências, Saúde – Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, v.28, n.2, abr.-jun. 2021. Available at: http://dx.doi. org/10.1590/S0104-59702021000200004. Abstract Biological evolution is often regarded as a central and unifying axis of biology. This article discusses historical aspects of this ideal of unification, as well as signs of its disintegration from the 1960s to 1980s. We argue that despite new proposals for the synthesis of biological knowledge, contemporary evolutionary biology is characterized by pluralism. The main points in favor of evolutionary pluralism are discussed and some consequences of this perspective are presented, particularly in terms of the ideal of a unified biology. Finally, we defend an evolutionary pluralism that critiques the ideal of unification as a scientific objective, but still favors local Leonardo Augusto Luvison Araújoi integrations.
    [Show full text]