NeoDarwinian Review

The study of human origins has long been dominated by the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis, a mid-20th-century fusion of Darwinian natural selection and Mendelian genetics, often referred to as neo-Darwinism. This framework has provided a  lens through which to view the fossil record, emphasizing the gradual accumulation of genetic mutations as the primary driver of evolutionary change. However, a recent special issue of the journal PaleoAnthropology, titled "Reconceiving Paleoanthropology in the Era of the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis: Niche Construction, Plasticity, and Inclusive Inheritance: Rethinking Human Origins with the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis," signals a significant shift in the field. This collection of papers argues for an "Extended Evolutionary Synthesis" (EES) that incorporates a more dynamic and multi-faceted understanding of evolution. Central to this reconceptualization is the burgeoning field of epigenetics, which, by revealing a ...

The framework of neo-Darwinism, a synthesis of Darwin's theory of natural selection and Mendelian genetics, has long provided a explanation for the diversity of life. It posits that evolution proceeds through the gradual accumulation of small, random mutations, with natural selection acting as the primary driver of change. A central tenet of this paradigm is that new genes predominantly arise from the duplication and subsequent divergence of existing genes. However, a growing body of evidence, exemplified by the groundbreaking paper "Origin of primate orphan genes: a comparative genomics approach" by Toll-Riera et al., presents a formidable challenge to this orthodox view. The discovery and characterization of orphan genes—genes unique to a specific lineage with no detectable homologs in other species—complicate the neo-Darwinian narrative, suggesting that the wellspring of genetic innovation is more varied and dynamic than previously understood. The study b...

A recent journal article , "The modern synthesis and “Progress” in evolution: a view from the journal literature" by Charles H. Pence, offers a nuanced and data-driven challenge to the long-held narrative of Neo-Darwinism. Through a meticulous textual analysis of scientific journals, the paper reveals a more complex and perhaps less resolute rejection of the concept of "progress" in evolution than the standard history of the Modern Synthesis would suggest. This historical insight, far from being a mere semantic footnote, subtly undermines the rigidly non-directional and purely contingent view of evolution that lies at the heart of the Neo-Darwinian framework. The Modern Synthesis, the fusion of Darwinian natural selection with Mendelian genetics that solidified in the mid-20th century, is often portrayed as the definitive moment when biology purged itself of teleological and progressivist thinking. Giants of the synthesis like Ernst Mayr and George Gaylo...

The grand edifice of 20th-century biology, the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis, also known as neo-Darwinism, has for decades provided a robust framework for understanding the diversification of life. This synthesis fused Darwin's theory of natural selection with Mendelian genetics, positing that evolution primarily proceeds through the gradual accumulation of random genetic mutations, sorted by the relentless sieve of natural selection. However, the 21st century has witnessed the rise of a more nuanced and complex understanding of heredity and evolution, often referred to as the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES). Central to this evolving perspective is the burgeoning field of epigenetics, which is fundamentally challenging the gene-centric dogma of neo-Darwinism and compelling a richer, more integrated view of evolutionary processes. The EES aptly captures the ongoing and dynamic nature of this scientific discourse. It is a serous challenge to neo-Darwinian principles...

The bedrock of modern evolutionary theory, neo-Darwinism, has long held that the emergence of new genes is a slow and steady process of tinkering. The prevailing model posits that novel genetic functions arise primarily through the duplication of existing genes, followed by the gradual accumulation of mutations under the guiding hand of natural selection. However, a growing body of evidence, crystallized in studies like "Origin of primate orphan genes: a comparative genomics approach," presents a formidable challenge to this orthodox view. The discovery and characterization of so-called "orphan genes" – genes unique to a specific lineage with no recognizable counterparts in other species – suggest that the story of genetic innovation may be far more dynamic and surprising than previously imagined, forcing a re-evaluation of the strictly gradualist framework of neo-Darwinism. The journal article , "Origin of primate orphan genes: a comparative genomi...

The established dogma of molecular biology, a cornerstone of neo-Darwinian thought, has long been anchored to a rigid principle: a protein's function is dictated by its precise, three-dimensional structure. This "structure-function" paradigm suggests a straightforward evolutionary pathway where random genetic mutations lead to changes in protein structure, which are then selected for or against based on their functional consequences. However, the discovery and burgeoning understanding of intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) are introducing a profound plot twist to this narrative. These proteins, which lack a stable, folded structure, are not evolutionary anomalies but are abundant and crucial players in cellular life, presenting a significant conceptual challenge to the strictly defined tenets of neo-Darwinism. At its core, neo-Darwinism posits that evolution proceeds through the gradual accumulation of random mutations within a pop...