ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2007
A generative bias towards average complexity in artificial cell lineages.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cell-based allometry: an approach for evaluation of complexity in morphogenesis.Quantitative biology (Beijing, China) · 2023Article
- Early effects of gene duplication on the robustness and phenotypic variability of gene regulatory networks.BMC bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Alignment of Cell Lineage Trees Elucidates Genetic Programs for the Development and Evolution of Cell Types.iScience · 2020Article
- Determinative developmental cell lineages are robust to cell deaths.PLoS genetics · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evolution of life on earth has been characterized by generalized long-term increases in phenotypic complexity. Although natural selection is a plausible cause for these trends, one alternative hypothesis--generative bias--has been proposed repeatedly based on theoretical considerations. Here, we introduce a computational model of a developmental system and use it to test the hypothesis that long-term increasing trends in phenotypic complexity are caused by a generative bias towards greater complexity. We use our model to generate random organisms with different levels of phenotypic complexity and analyse the distributions of mutational effects on complexity. We show that highly complex organisms are easy to generate but there are trade-offs between different measures of complexity. We also find that only the simplest possible phenotypes show a generative bias towards higher complexity, whereas phenotypes with high complexity display a generative bias towards lower complexity. These results suggest that generative biases alone are not sufficient to explain long-term evolutionary increases in phenotypic complexity. Rather, our finding of a generative bias towards average complexity argues for a critical role of selective biases in driving increases in phenotypic complexity and in maintaining high complexity once it has evolved.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.