Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22045380›Full record

ArticleHeredity2012

Evolution of adaptive phenotypic traits without positive Darwinian selection.

A L Hughes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heredity, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. The waiting time problem in a model hominin population.Theoretical biology & medical modelling · 2015
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Evolutionary ecology of the marine Roseobacter clade.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2014
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Whole-genome sequencing identifies a recurrent functional synonymous mutation in melanoma.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2013
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Dangers of 'adaptation'.Heredity · 2012
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

A L HughesDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA. austin@biol.sc.edu

Funding

POLYMORPHISM &EVOLUTION OF MHC GENESR01GM043940 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI HUGHES, AUSTIN L. · 1990 to 2010
$1.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM43940NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM043940
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent evidence suggests the frequent occurrence of a simple non-Darwinian (but non-Lamarckian) model for the evolution of adaptive phenotypic traits, here entitled the plasticity-relaxation-mutation (PRM) mechanism. This mechanism involves ancestral phenotypic plasticity followed by specialization in one alternative environment and thus the permanent expression of one alternative phenotype. Once this specialization occurs, purifying selection on the molecular basis of other phenotypes is relaxed. Finally, mutations that permanently eliminate the pathways leading to alternative phenotypes can be fixed by genetic drift. Although the generality of the PRM mechanism is at present unknown, I discuss evidence for its widespread occurrence, including the prevalence of exaptations in evolution, evidence that phenotypic plasticity has preceded adaptation in a number of taxa and evidence that adaptive traits have resulted from loss of alternative developmental pathways. The PRM mechanism can easily explain cases of explosive adaptive radiation, as well as recently reported cases of apparent adaptive evolution over ecological time.

Indexed as

Adaptation, BiologicalBiological EvolutionModels, BiologicalPhenotypeGenetic DriftSelection, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID22045380
PMCPMC3313059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.