Biology & Philosophy

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 339–364 | Cite as

Historicity and experimental evolution

  • Eric DesjardinsEmail author


Biologists in the last 50 years have increasingly emphasized the role of historical contingency in explaining the distribution and dynamics of biological systems. However, recent work in philosophy of biology has shown that historical contingency carries various interpretations and that we are still lacking a general understanding of “historicity,” i.e., a framework from which to interpret why and to what extent history matters in biological processes. Building from examples and analyses of the long-term experimental evolution (LTEE) project, this paper argues that historicity possess three essential conditions: (1) multiple possible pasts, (2) multiple possible outcomes at a given instant, and (3) a relationship of causal dependence between these two sets. These criteria can be further specified in two general forms of historicity: dependence on initial conditions and path dependence. More attention is devoted to developing a rigorous account of the latter, which captures the type of historicity displayed by stochastic processes. This paper also highlights that it is often more productive to adopt an instant-relative approach and think in terms of degree of historicity instead of trying to maintain a rigid and absolute dichotomy between historical and ahistorical (completely convergent) processes.


Historicty Path dependence Contingency Unpredictability Experimental evolution LTEE 



I wish to thank John Beatty, Paul Bartha, Christopher Stephens, Robert Batterman, Gillian Barker and Christopher Smeenk, and the reviewers of Biology and Philosophy for their comments on earlier drafts of this paper.


  1. Arthur WB (1994) Increasing returns and path dependence in the economy. University of Michigan Press, Ann ArborGoogle Scholar
  2. Bassanini A, Dosi G (1999) When and how chance and human will can twist the arms of clio. LEM Working Paper Series 05. PisaGoogle Scholar
  3. Beatty J (2006) Replaying life’s tape. J Philos 53(7):336–362Google Scholar
  4. Beatty J, Desjardins EC (2009) Natural selection and history. Biol Philos 24:231–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belnap ND, Perloff M, Xu M (2001) Facing the future: agents and choices in our indeterminist world. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Ben-Menahem Y (1997) Historical contingency. Ratio 10:99–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Blount ZD, Borland CZ, Lenski RE (2008) Historical contingency and the evolution of a key innovation in an experimental population of escherichia coli. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(23):7899–7906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brown JH (1995) Macroecology. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  9. Castaldi C, Dosi G (2006) The grip of history and the scope for novelty: some results and open questions on path dependence in economic processes. Understanding change: models, methodologies, and metaphors. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 99–128Google Scholar
  10. David PA (2001) Path Dependence, its Critics, and the quest for ‘historical economics’. Evolution and path dependence in economic ideas. Edward Elgar, Northampton, pp 15–40Google Scholar
  11. de Duve C (1995) Vital dust: the origin and evolution of life on earth. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Desjardins EC (2009) Historicity in biology. PhD thesis, University of British Columbia,
  13. Gould SJ (1970) Dollo on dollo’s law: irreversibility and the status of evolutionary laws. J Hist Biol 3(2):189–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gould SJ (1980) The Panda’s thumb: more reflections in natural history. W.W. Norton and Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Gould SJ (1989) Wonderful life: the Burgess shale and the nature of history. W.W. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Gould SJ (1991) The Panda’s thumb of technology. Bully for brontosaurus: reflections in natural history. W.W. Norton and Company, New York, pp 59–75Google Scholar
  17. Gould SJ (2002) The structure of evolutionary theory. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. London. Stephen Jay Gould: ill. 26 cm; Includes bibliographical references (pp. 1344–1387) and indexGoogle Scholar
  18. Gould SJ, Lewontin RC (1979) The spandrels of san marco and the panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 205(1161):581–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Griffiths KSPE (1999) Sex and death: an introduction to philosophy of biology. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  20. Handford P (1999) Infering the past.
  21. Hodgson GM (1993) Economics and evolution: brining life back into economics. The University of Michgan Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  22. Johnson AP, Lenski RE, Hoppensteadt FC (1995) Theoretical analysis of divergence in mean fitness between initially identical populations. Proc R Soc Lond Series B Biol Sci 259:125–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lenski RE (1998-2010) Long-term experimental evolution in escherichia coli.
  24. Lenski RE, Rose MR, Simpson SC, Tadler SC (1991) Long-term experimental evolution in escherichia coli.: adaptation and divergence during 2,000 generations. Am Nat 138(6):1315–1341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lenski RE, Travisano M (1994) Dynamics of adaptation and diversification: a 10,000-generation experiment with bacterial populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91(15):6808–6814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lewontin RC (1966) Is nature probable or capricious? Bioscience 16:25–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lewontin RC (1967) The principle of historicity in evolution. Mathematical challenges to the Neo-Darwinian interpretation of evolution. The Wistar Institute Press, Philadelphia, pp 81–88Google Scholar
  28. Losos JB, Jackman TR, Larson A, de Queiroz K, Rodriguez-Schettino L (1998) Contingency and determinism in replicated adaptive radiations of island lizards. Science 279(5359):2115–2118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mahoney J (2000) Path dependence in historical sociology. Theory Soc 29(4):507CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mahoney J (2006) Analyzing path dependence: lessons from the social sciences. In: Understanding change: models, methodology, and metaphors. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 129–139Google Scholar
  31. Morris SC (2003) Life’s solution: inevitable humans in a lonely universe. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Page SE (2006) Path dependence. Q J Political Sci (1):87–115Google Scholar
  33. Pickett ST, Kolasa J, Jones CG (1994) Ecological understanding: the nature of theory and the theory of nature. Academic Press, INC, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  34. Pierson P (2004) Politics in time: history, institutions, and social analysis. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  35. Price PW (2003) Macroevolutionary theory on macroecological patterns. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Peter W. Price. ill. 24 cmGoogle Scholar
  36. Ricklefs RE, Schluter D (1993) Species diversity in ecological communities: historical and geographical perspectives. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  37. Sober E (1988) Reconstructing the past : parsimony, evolution, and inference. MIT Press, Cambridge Mass. Elliott Sober. ill. 24 cmGoogle Scholar
  38. Strong DR (1984) Ecological communities: conceptual issues and the evidence. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  39. Szathmáry E (2006) Path dependence and historical contingency in biology. Understanding change: models, methodologies, and metaphors. Palgrave Macmillan, New York, pp 140–157Google Scholar
  40. Travisano M, Mongold JA, Bennett AF, Lenski RE (1995) Experimental tests of the roles of adaptation, chance and history in evolution. Science 267:87–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tucker A (2004) Our knowledge of the past: a philosophy of historiography. Cambridge University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wahl LM, Krakauer DC (2000) Models of experimental evolution: the role of genetic chance and selective necessity. Genetics 156:1437–1448Google Scholar
  43. Williams GC (1992) Natural selection: domains, levels, and challenges. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Wilson EO (1992) The diversity of life. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  45. Wimsatt WC (2001) Generative entrenchment and the developmental systems approach to evolutionary processes. In: Oyama S, Gray R, Griffiths P (eds) Cycles of contingency: developmental systems and evolution. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 219–237Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Rotman Institute of PhilosophyThe University of Western OntarioLondonCanada

Personalised recommendations