ArticleEssays in biochemistry2022
Modelling the evolution of novelty: a review.
Article in Essays in biochemistry, 2022. 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.
- Computational model of flower pattern evolution predicts spontaneous emergence of boundary cell types across the petal epidermis.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2026Article
- The evolution of multicellularity and cell differentiation symposium: bridging evolutionary cell biology and computational modelling using emerging model systems.Biology open · 2024Review
- A Unifying Hypothesis for the Genome Dynamics Proposed to Underlie Neuropsychiatric Phenotypes.Genes · 2024Review
- Obligate endosymbiosis enables genome expansion during eukaryogenesis.Communications biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Evolution has been an inventive process since its inception, about 4 billion years ago. It has generated an astounding diversity of novel mechanisms and structures for adaptation to the environment, for competition and cooperation, and for organisation of the internal and external dynamics of the organism. How does this novelty come about? Evolution builds with the tools available, and on top of what it has already built - therefore, much novelty consists in repurposing old functions in a different context. In the process, the tools themselves evolve, allowing yet more novelty to arise. Despite evolutionary novelty being the most striking observable of evolution, it is not accounted for in classical evolutionary theory. Nevertheless, mathematical and computational models that illustrate mechanisms of evolutionary innovation have been developed. In the present review, we present and compare several examples of computational evo-devo models that capture two aspects of novelty: 'between-level novelty' and 'constructive novelty.' Novelty can evolve between predefined levels of organisation to dynamically transcode biological information across these levels - as occurs during development. Constructive novelty instead generates a level of biological organisation by exploiting the lower level as an informational scaffold to open a new space of possibilities - an example being the evolution of multicellularity. We propose that the field of computational evo-devo is well-poised to reveal many more exciting mechanisms for the evolution of novelty. A broader theory of evolutionary novelty may well be attainable in the near future.
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.