Symbiogenesis challenges NeoDarwinism


In her article "Symbiogenesis and the New Synthesis," Lynn Margulis argues that the theory of symbiogenesis, which proposes that new species can arise through the fusion of genomes from different organisms, challenges the central tenets of neo-Darwinism.

Neo-Darwinism is the prevailing theory of evolution, which holds that all new species arise through the process of natural selection acting on random mutations. Margulis argued that symbiogenesis is a much more important mechanism of evolutionary change than neo-Darwinism allows for.

One of the main ways in which symbiogenesis challenges neo-Darwinism is by providing a mechanism for the rapid emergence of new and complex traits. Neo-Darwinism holds that new traits can only arise gradually, through the accumulation of small, random mutations. However, symbiogenesis can allow for the sudden emergence of new traits by combining the genomes of two or more organisms.


For example, the mitochondria and chloroplasts in eukaryotic cells are thought to have arisen through endosymbiosis, a type of symbiosis in which one organism lives inside another. Mitochondria are thought to have originated from bacteria, while chloroplasts are thought to have originated from cyanobacteria. The fusion of the genomes of these endosymbionts with the genomes of their host cells would have resulted in the sudden emergence of new and complex traits, such as the ability to produce energy from food (mitochondria) or to photosynthesize (chloroplasts).

Another way in which symbiogenesis challenges neo-Darwinism is by providing a mechanism for cooperative evolution. Neo-Darwinism is often seen as a competitive theory of evolution, in which organisms are constantly struggling to survive and reproduce. However, symbiogenesis shows that organisms can also cooperate with each other to their mutual benefit.

For example, many plants and animals have symbiotic relationships with bacteria. Some of these bacteria help their hosts to digest food, while others provide them with essential nutrients. The cooperation between these organisms has allowed them to evolve new and complex traits that would not be possible on their own.

Margulis's theory of symbiogenesis has been controversial since she first proposed it in the 1960s. However, it has gained increasing acceptance in recent years, as more and more evidence has emerged to support it. Today, symbiogenesis is widely recognized as a major driving force in evolution.

Here are some specific examples of how symbiogenesis challenges neo-Darwinism:

  • Neo-Darwinism has difficulty explaining the origin of eukaryotic cells. Eukaryotic cells are much more complex than prokaryotic cells, and they have a number of features that are not found in prokaryotes, such as a nucleus, mitochondria, and chloroplasts. Margulis's theory of endosymbiosis provides a plausible explanation for the origin of these features.

  • Neo-Darwinism has difficulty explaining the rapid emergence of new species during the Cambrian Explosion. The Cambrian Explosion was a period of rapid evolutionary change that occurred about 540 million years ago. During this time, many new and complex animal body plans appeared. Margulis has argued that symbiogenesis played a major role in the Cambrian Explosion.

  • Neo-Darwinism has difficulty explaining the evolution of complex social behaviors, such as those found in humans and other animals. Margulis has argued that symbiogenesis can help to explain the evolution of these behaviors by providing a mechanism for cooperation between individuals.

Overall, Margulis's theory of symbiogenesis provides a new and exciting way to think about evolution. It challenges the central tenets of neo-Darwinism and suggests that cooperation and symbiosis are just as important as competition in driving evolutionary change.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Natural Selection has not been accurately measured since Darwin

Image
Francis Crick's term "frozen accident" falsely described the seeming rigidity of the genetic code, its apparent inability to accommodate additional amino acids beyond the standard 20. This observation had puzzled scientists for decades, as the genetic code seems to have reached a plateau in its expansion despite the potential for incorporating new amino acids with novel properties. NeoDarwinian thinking reasoned greater natural selection could occur with more codons. Several hypotheses were put forward to explain this apparent standstill in the genetic code's evolution. Crick and others  eventually applied natural selection to think redundant codons were neutral as to account for neutral selection . The question of why the genetic code stopped incorporating new amino acids remained a fascinating topic in evolutionary biology till Cas9 Crispr. The redundancy of codons, where multiple codons can specify the same amino acid, has long been considered a neutr
Read more

Greatest threat to Evolution in 60 years

Image
60 years of evolution studies are threatened by nonneutral synonymous mutations. Synonymous mutations are mutations that change a codon in a gene but do not change the amino acid that is encoded by that codon. For many years, synonymous mutations were thought to be neutral, meaning that they had no effect on the fitness of an organism. However, recent research has shown that this is not always the case. In fact, many synonymous mutations can have a negative effect on fitness. This is because synonymous mutations can affect the way in which a gene is expressed. For example, a synonymous mutation can change the structure of a gene transcript, which can make it more difficult for the gene to be translated into a protein. Synonymous mutations can also affect the rate at which a gene is transcribed or translated. The discovery that synonymous mutations can be nonneutral has important implications for the study of evolution. For example, it means that we need to be more careful w
Read more

The Origin at 150: Charting a New Evolutionary Voyage on Post-Genomic Seas

Image
“The summary of the state of affairs on the 150th anniversary of the Origin is somewhat shocking: in the post-genomic era, all major tenets of the Modern Synthesis are, if not outright overturned, replaced by a new and incomparably more complex vision of the key aspects of evolution. So, not to mince words, the Modern Synthesis is gone.” -EV Koonin, cited by over 250,000 scientists. The Origin at 150: Charting a New Evolutionary Voyage on Post-Genomic Seas As the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin's epochal "On the Origin of Species" casts a long shadow, evolutionary biologist Eugene V. Koonin throws down a gauntlet in his essay "The Origin at 150: Is a new evolutionary synthesis in sight?" He contends that the Modern Synthesis, the reigning framework since the 1950s, has crumbled under the weight of post-genomic discoveries. This audacious claim compels us to ask: has the ship of evolutionary understanding truly run aground, and if so, can a new v
Read more