ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2016
Some mechanistic requirements for major transitions.
Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neutral theory of cooperative dynamics.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Advances in Cytotoxicity Testing: From In Vitro Assays to In Silico Models.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Molecular evolution between chemistry and biology : The interplay of competition, cooperation, and mutation.European biophysics journal : EBJ · 2018Review
- Spatial dynamics of synthetic microbial mutualists and their parasites.PLoS computational biology · 2017Article
- The major synthetic evolutionary transitions.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Major transitions in nature and human society are accompanied by a substantial change towards higher complexity in the core of the evolving system. New features are established, novel hierarchies emerge, new regulatory mechanisms are required and so on. An obvious way to achieve higher complexity is integration of autonomous elements into new organized systems whereby the previously independent units give up their autonomy at least in part. In this contribution, we reconsider the more than 40 years old hypercycle model and analyse it by the tools of stochastic chemical kinetics. An open system is implemented in the form of a flow reactor. The formation of new dynamically organized units through integration of competitors is identified with transcritical bifurcations. In the stochastic model, the fully organized state is quasi-stationary whereas the unorganized state corresponds to a population with natural selection. The stability of the organized state depends strongly on the number of individual subspecies, n, that have to be integrated: two and three classes of individuals, [Formula: see text] and [Formula: see text], readily form quasi-stationary states. The four-membered deterministic dynamical system, [Formula: see text], is stable but in the stochastic approach self-enhancing fluctuations drive it into extinction. In systems with five and more classes of individuals, [Formula: see text], the state of cooperation is unstable and the solutions of the deterministic ODEs exhibit large amplitude oscillations. In the stochastic system self-enhancing fluctuations lead to extinction as observed with [Formula: see text] Interestingly, cooperative systems in nature are commonly two-membered as shown by numerous examples of binary symbiosis. A few cases of symbiosis of three partners, called three-way symbiosis, have been found and were analysed within the past decade. Four-way symbiosis is rather rare but was reported to occur in fungus-growing ants. The model reported here can be used to illustrate the interplay between competition and cooperation whereby we obtain a hint on the role that resources play in major transitions. Abundance of resources seems to be an indispensable prerequisite of radical innovation that apparently needs substantial investments. Economists often claim that scarcity is driving innovation. Our model sheds some light on this apparent contradiction. In a nutshell, the answer is: scarcity drives optimization and increase in efficiency but abundance is required for radical novelty and the development of new features.This article is part of the themed issue 'The major synthetic evolutionary transitions'.
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.