Advertisement

Biological Dogmas in Relation to the Origin of Evolutionary Novelties

  • Patricia Tatemoto
  • Carlos Guerrero-Bosagna
Chapter

Abstract

Current evolutionary knowledge emerges influenced by two main currents of thinking. While some call for more variables to be considered in evolution, others consider that evolutionary outcomes are mainly associated with the genomic component. In spite of each individual point of view, however, current knowledge from many biological disciplines is constantly telling us of new advancements in biological processes. The aim of the present book chapter is to evaluate what historically in evolutionary thinking has been assumed as true and what is currently being contested by current biological knowledge. Importantly, no matter what the current knowledge about these topics is, they are still assumed as true in evolutionary thinking, making them factual dogmas. In the present chapter we describe and discuss three ‘evolutionary dogmas’, present in scientific and/or pedagogical writing, for which we think that there is plenty of biological evidence demonstrating the contrary: (i) ‘Natural selection is the main/only guiding force in evolution’; (ii) ‘Evolution proceeds driven by what is beneficial’; (iii) ‘Lamarck was wrong about environmental effects and heritability’. Many of our arguments are based on recent epigenetic knowledge showing that epigenetic mechanism can on one hand induce genomic changes, and on the other hand respond to environmental factors. Through epigenetic mechanisms, the environment is able to modulate individual phenotypes even before conception, with consequences that can transcend generations. We propose that recent epigenetic knowledge can help to change some of these described dogmas to advance scientific knowledge in evolution.

References

  1. Adelson DL, Buckley RM, Ivancevic AM et al (2015) Retrotransposons: genomic and trans-genomic agents of change. Evolutionary biology: biodiversification from genotype to phenotype. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 55–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alonso-Magdalena P, Rivera FJ, Guerrero-Bosagna C (2016) Bisphenol-A and metabolic diseases: epigenetic, developmental and transgenerational basis. Environ Epigenet 2.  https://doi.org/10.1093/eep/dvw022
  3. Anway MD, Cupp AS, Uzumcu M, Skinner MK (2005) Epigenetic transgenerational actions of endocrine disruptors and male fertility. Science (80–) 308:1466–1469.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1108190
  4. Baker TR, King-Heiden TC, Peterson RE, Heideman W (2014a) Dioxin induction of transgenerational inheritance of disease in zebrafish. Mol Cell Endocrinol 398:36–41.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mce.2014.08.011CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Baker TR, Peterson RE, Heideman W (2014b) Using zebrafish as a model system for studying the transgenerational effects of dioxin. Toxicol Sci 138:403–411.  https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/kfu006CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Baxter EM, Mulligan J, Hall SA et al (2016) Positive and negative gestational handling influences placental traits and mother-offspring behavior in dairy goats. Physiol Behav 157:129–138.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2016.02.001CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernardino T, Tatemoto P, Morrone B et al (2016) Piglets born from sows fed high fibre diets during pregnancy are less aggressive prior to weaning. PLoS ONE 11:1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bhandari RK, vom Saal FS, Tillitt DE (2015) Transgenerational effects from early developmental exposures to bisphenol A or 17α-ethinylestradiol in medaka, Oryzias latipes. Sci Rep 5:9303.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep09303
  9. Bowler PJ (1983) The eclipse of Darwinism: anti-Darwinian evolution theories in the decades around 1900. Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  10. Braastad BO (159AD) Effects of prenatal stress on behaviour of offspring\nof laboratory and farmed mammals. Appl Anim Behav Sci 61:1998.  https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-1591(98)00188-9
  11. Brawand D, Wagner CE, Li YI et al (2015) The genomic substrate for adaptive radiation in African cichlid fish. Nature 513:375–381.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brun J-M, Bernadet M-D, Cornuez A et al (2015) Influence of grand-mother diet on offspring performances through the male line in Muscovy duck. BMC Genet 16:145.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12863-015-0303-zCrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Burkhardt RW Jr (2013) Lamarck, evolution, and the inheritance of acquired characters. Genetics 194:793–805.  https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.113.151852CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Buss DM (1983) Evolutionary biology and personality psychology: implications of genetic variability. Pers Individ Dif 4:51–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(83)90052-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carnero-Montoro E, Alarcón-Riquelme ME (2018) Epigenome-wide association studies for systemic autoimmune diseases: the road behind and the road ahead. Clin Immunol.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clim.2018.03.014
  16. Collins DW, Jukes TH (1994) Rates of transition and transversion in coding sequences since the human-rodent divergence. Genomics 20:386–396.  https://doi.org/10.1006/geno.1994.1192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Cortijo S, Wardenaar R, Colome-Tatche M et al (2014) Mapping the epigenetic basis of complex traits. Science (80–) 343:1145–1148.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1248127
  18. Coulon M, Wellman CL, Marjara IS et al (2013) Early adverse experience alters dendritic spine density and gene expression in prefrontal cortex and hippocampus in lambs. Psychoneuroendocrinology 38:1112–1121.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2012.10.018CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Craig JR, Jenkins TG, Carrell DT, Hotaling JM (2017) Obesity, male infertility, and the sperm epigenome. Fertil Steril 107:848–859.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.02.115CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Danchin E (2013) Avatars of information: towards an inclusive evolutionary synthesis. Trends Ecol Evol 28(6):351–358Google Scholar
  21. Darnaudéry M, Maccari S (2008) Epigenetic programming of the stress response in male and female rats by prenatal restraint stress. Brain Res Rev 57:571–585.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2007.11.004CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Dawkins R (1978) The selfish gene. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  23. Dobzhansky T (1977) Evolution. Freeman, W.HGoogle Scholar
  24. Donkin I, Barrès R (2018) Sperm epigenetics and influence of environmental factors. Mol Metab 1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmet.2018.02.006
  25. Dudley KJ, Li X, Kobor MS et al (2011) Epigenetic mechanisms mediating vulnerability and resilience to psychiatric disorders. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 35:1544–1551.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.12.016CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Dukas R (2013) Effects of learning on evolution: robustness, innovation and speciation. Anim Behav 85:1023–1030.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ANBEHAV.2012.12.030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Duret L (2008) Neutral theory: the null hypothesis of molecular evolution. Nat Educ 1:803–806Google Scholar
  28. Eyre-Walker A, Keightley PD (2007) The distribution of fitness effects of new mutations. Nat Rev Genet 8:610–618.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2146CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Fernald RD (2015) Social behaviour: can it change the brain? Anim Behav 103:259–265.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2015.01.019CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Friedman J, Alm EJ, Shapiro BJ (2013) Sympatric speciation: when is it possible in bacteria? PLoS ONE 8:e53539.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053539CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Galtier N, Duret L (2007) Adaptation or biased gene conversion? Extending the null hypothesis of molecular evolution. Trends Genet 23:273–277.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2007.03.011CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Gilbert SF, Bosch TCG, Ledón-Rettig C (2015) Eco-Evo-Devo: developmental symbiosis and developmental plasticity as evolutionary agents. Nat Rev Genet 16:611–622.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3982CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Gissis S, Jablonka E (2011) Transformations of lamarckism: from subtle fluids to molecular biology. MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  34. Goerlich VC, Nätt D, Elfwing M et al (2012) Transgenerational effects of early experience on behavioral, hormonal and gene expression responses to acute stress in the precocial chicken. Horm Behav 61:711–718.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.YHBEH.2012.03.006CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Gojobori T, Moriyama EN, Kimura M (1990) Molecular clock of viral evolution, and the neutral theory. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 87:10015–10018.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.87.24.10015CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Gould SJ, Lewontin RC (1979) The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proc R Soc London Ser B Biol Sci 205:581 LP-598Google Scholar
  37. Govindaraju D, Atzmon G, Barzilai N (2015) Genetics, lifestyle and longevity: lessons from centenarians. Appl Transl Genomics 4:23–32.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atg.2015.01.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gregoire M-C, Massonneau J, Simard O et al (2013) Male-driven de novo mutations in haploid germ cells. Mol Hum Reprod 19:495–499.  https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gat022CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Grey M (2017) Lifestyle determinants of health: isn’t it all about genetics and environment? Nurs Outlook 65:501–505.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.OUTLOOK.2017.04.011CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Guerrero-Bosagna C (2012) Finalism in Darwinian and Lamarckian evolution: lessons from epigenetics and developmental biology. Evol Biol 39:283–300.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-012-9163-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Guerrero-Bosagna C (2017) Evolution with no reason: a neutral view on epigenetic changes, genomic variability, and evolutionary novelty. Bioscience 67:469–476.  https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Guerrero-Bosagna C, Jensen P (2015) Globalization, climate change, and transgenerational epigenetic inheritance: will our descendants be at risk? Clin Epigenet 7:8.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13148-014-0043-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Guerrero-Bosagna C, Settles M, Lucker B, Skinner MK (2010) Epigenetic transgenerational actions of vinclozolin on promoter regions of the sperm epigenome. PLoS ONE 5:e13100.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0013100CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. Guerrero-Bosagna C, Covert TR, Haque MM et al (2012) Epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of vinclozolin induced mouse adult onset disease and associated sperm epigenome biomarkers. Reprod Toxicol 34:694–707.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reprotox.2012.09.005CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Haig D (2011) Lamarck ascending! Philos Theory Biol 3.  https://doi.org/10.3998/ptb.6959004.0003.004
  46. Hall BK (2000) Guest editorial: Evo-devo or devo-evo—does it matter? Evol Dev 2:177–178.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-142x.2000.00003e.xCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Hrvatin S, Hochbaum DR, Nagy MA et al (2018) Single-cell analysis of experience-dependent transcriptomic states in the mouse visual cortex. Nat Neurosci 21:120–129.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-017-0029-5CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Hubbell S (2005) Neutral theory in community ecology and the hypothesis of functional equivalence. Funct Ecol 19:166–172.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0269-8463.2005.00965.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hubbell SP (2014) Neutral theory and the evolution of ecological equivalence. Ecology 87:1387–1398.  https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2006)87[1387:NTATEO]2.0.CO;2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ichinose G, Arita T (2008) The role of migration and founder effect for the evolution of cooperation in a multilevel selection context. Ecol Model 210:221–230.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLMODEL.2007.07.025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Jacobs MN, Marczylo EL, Guerrero-Bosagna C, Rüegg J (2017) Marked for life: epigenetic effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals. Annu Rev Environ Resour 42:105–160.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-102016-061111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Jirtle RL, Skinner MK (2007) Environmental epigenomics and disease susceptibility. Nat Rev Genet 8:253–262.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2045CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. Johannes F, Porcher E, Teixeira FK et al (2009) Assessing the impact of transgenerational epigenetic variation on complex traits. PLoS Genet 5:e1000530.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000530CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. Johnson AV (2017) An update: genetic mutations and childhood cancers. J Nurse Pract 14:230–237.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurpra.2017.08.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Johnson JS, Evans-Molina C (2015) Translational implications of the β-cell epigenome in diabetes mellitus. Transl Res 165:91–101.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trsl.2014.03.002CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Johnston SE, Gratten J, Berenos C et al (2013) Life history trade-offs at a single locus maintain sexually selected genetic variation. Nature 502:93–95.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12489CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Kalinowski ST, Leonard MJ, Andrews TM (2010) Nothing in evolution makes sense except in the light of DNA. CBE Life Sci Educ 9:87–97.  https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.09-12-0088CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  58. Kautt AF, Machado-Schiaffino G, Meyer A (2016) Multispecies outcomes of sympatric speciation after admixture with the source population in two radiations of Nicaraguan Crater Lake Cichlids. PLoS Genet 12:e1006157.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1006157CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. Khan MI, Rath S, Adhami VM, Mukhtar H (2018) Targeting epigenome with dietary nutrients in cancer: current advances and future challenges. Pharmacol Res 129:375–387.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrs.2017.12.008CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Kim JK, Samaranayake M, Pradhan S (2009) Epigenetic mechanisms in mammals. Cell Mol Life Sci 66:596–612.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-008-8432-4CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Kimura M (1968) Evolutionary rate at the molecular level. Nature 217:624–626.  https://doi.org/10.1038/217624a0CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Kocher TD (2004) Adaptive evolution and explosive speciation: the cichlid fish model. Nat Rev Genet 5:288–298.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1316CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Kraaijeveld K, Kraaijeveld-Smit FJL, Maan ME (2011) Sexual selection and speciation: the comparative evidence revisited. Biol Rev 86:367–377.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.2010.00150.xCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Kramer JM, Kochinke K, Oortveld MAW et al (2011) Epigenetic regulation of learning and memory by Drosophila EHMT/G9a. PLoS Biol 9:e1000569.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000569CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  65. Laland K, Uller T, Feldman M et al (2014) Does evolutionary theory need a rethink? Nature 514:161–164.  https://doi.org/10.1038/514161aCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Leijs R, van Nes EH, Watts CH et al (2012) Evolution of blind beetles in isolated aquifers: a test of alternative modes of speciation. PLoS ONE 7:e34260.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034260CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. Leroux S, Gourichon D, Leterrier C et al (2017) Embryonic environment and transgenerational effects in quail. Genet Sel Evol 49:14.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12711-017-0292-7CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. Levasseur A, Orlando L, Bailly X et al (2007) Conceptual bases for quantifying the role of the environment on gene evolution: the participation of positive selection and neutral evolution. Biol Rev 82:551–572.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185X.2007.00024.xCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Lind L, Lind PM, Lejonklou MH et al (2016) Uppsala consensus statement on environmental contaminants and the global obesity epidemic. Environ Health Perspect 124:A81–A83.  https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1511115CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  70. Lynch M (2007) The frailty of adaptive hypotheses for the origins of organismal complexity. Proc Natl Acad Sci 104:8597 LP-8604Google Scholar
  71. Mattick JS (2012) Rocking the foundations of molecular genetics. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109:16400–16401Google Scholar
  72. Mayr E (1961) Cause and effect in biology. Science 134:1501–1506.  https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.134.3489.1501CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. McCullough EL, Miller CW, Emlen DJ (2016) Why sexually selected weapons are not ornaments. Trends Ecol Evol 31:742–751.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2016.07.004CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Mesoudi A, Chang L, Dall SRX, Thornton A (2016) The evolution of individual and cultural variation in social learning. Trends Ecol Evol 31:215–225.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2015.12.012CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Meyer U, Feldon J, Fatemi SH (2009) In-vivo rodent models for the experimental investigation of prenatal immune activation effects in neurodevelopmental brain disorders. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 33:1061–1079.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.05.001CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Mohan M, Mellick GD (2017) Role of the VPS35 D620N mutation in Parkinson’s disease. Park Relat Disord 36:10–18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.parkreldis.2016.12.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Necsulea A, Kaessmann H (2014) Evolutionary dynamics of coding and non-coding transcriptomes. Nat Rev Genet 15:734–748.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg3802CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Noble D (2013) Physiology is rocking the foundations of evolutionary biology. Exp Physiol 98:1235–1243.  https://doi.org/10.1113/expphysiol.2012.071134CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Poletto R, Steibel JP, Siegford JM, Zanella AJ (2006) Effects of early weaning and social isolation on the expression of glucocorticoid and mineralocorticoid receptor and 11beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 1 and 2 mRNAs in the frontal cortex and hippocampus of piglets. Brain Res 1067:36–42.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2005.10.001CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Ponting CP, Lunter G (2006) Signatures of adaptive evolution within human non-coding sequence. Hum Mol Genet 15:R170–R175.  https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddl182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. Prentis PJ, Wilson JRU, Dormontt EE et al (2008) Adaptive evolution in invasive species. Trends Plant Sci 13:288–294.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TPLANTS.2008.03.004CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. QvarnstrÖm A, Vallin N, Rudh A (2012) The role of male contest competition over mates in speciation. Curr Zool 58:493–509.  https://doi.org/10.1093/czoolo/58.3.493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Ramadoss M, Mahadevan V (2018) Targeting the cancer epigenome: synergistic therapy with bromodomain inhibitors. Drug Discov Today 23:76–89.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drudis.2017.09.011CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Richards EJ (2006) Inherited epigenetic variation—revisiting soft inheritance. Nat Rev Genet 7:395–401.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg1834CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Rizzuto D, Mossello E, Fratiglioni L et al (2017) Personality and survival in older age: the role of lifestyle behaviors and health status. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 25:1363–1372.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAGP.2017.06.008CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Rodríguez RL, Boughman JW, Gray DA et al (2013) Diversification under sexual selection: the relative roles of mate preference strength and the degree of divergence in mate preferences. Ecol Lett 16:964–974.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12142CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. Rutherford KMD, Piastowska-Ciesielska A, Donald RD et al (2014) Prenatal stress produces anxiety prone female offspring and impaired maternal behaviour in the domestic pig. Physiol Behav 129:255–264.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.02.052CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Sequeira P, Chen Y-S, Weiss MA (2015) Mutation-driven evolution: microsatellite instability drives speciation in a mammalian taxon. Evolutionary biology: biodiversification from genotype to phenotype. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 141–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Sharma U, Rando OJ (2017) Metabolic inputs into the epigenome. Cell Metab 25:544–558.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2017.02.003CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Skinner MK (2014) Endocrine disruptor induction of epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of disease. Mol Cell Endocrinol 398:4–12.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mce.2014.07.019CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  91. Skinner MK, Manikkam M, Guerrero-Bosagna C (2010) Epigenetic transgenerational actions of environmental factors in disease etiology. Trends Endocrinol Metab 21:214–222.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tem.2009.12.007CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  92. Srinivas M, Verselis VK, White TW (2018) Human diseases associated with connexin mutations. Biochim Biophys Acta Biomembr 1860:192–201.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbamem.2017.04.024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Stojković V, Fujimori DG (2017) Mutations in RNA methylating enzymes in disease. Curr Opin Chem Biol 41:20–27.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpa.2017.10.002CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  94. Sun B, Hu L, Luo ZY et al (2016) DNA methylation perspectives in the pathogenesis of autoimmune diseases. Clin Immunol 164:21–27.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clim.2016.01.011CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Svensson EI, Verzijden MN, Cate C et al (2012) The impact of learning on sexual selection and speciation. The impact of learning on sexual selection and speciation 27:511–519.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.05.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Teicher MH, Samson JA, Anderson CM, Ohashi K (2016) The effects of childhood maltreatment on brain structure, function and connectivity. Nat Rev Neurosci 17:652–666.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2016.111CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  97. Thorpe RS, Surget-Groba Y, Johansson H (2010) Genetic tests for ecological and allopatric speciation in Anoles on an Island Archipelago. PLoS Genet 6:e1000929.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000929CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  98. Urakubo A, Jarskog LF, Lieberman JA, Gilmore JH (2001) Prenatal exposure to maternal infection alters cytokine expression in the placenta, amniotic fluid, and fetal brain. Schizophr Res 47:27–36.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-9964(00)00032-3CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. Waddington CH (1954) Evolution and epistemology. Nature 173:880–880.  https://doi.org/10.1038/173880a0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Wagner A (2008) Neutralism and selectionism: a network-based reconciliation. Nat Rev Genet 9:965–974.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2473CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Weinstock M (2008) The long-term behavioural consequences of prenatal stress. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 32:1073–1086.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2008.03.002CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  102. Wood KE, Komarova NL (2018) Cooperation-based branching as a mechanism of evolutionary speciation. J Theor Biol 445:166–186.  https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JTBI.2018.02.033CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Avian Behavioural Genomics and Physiology GroupIFM, Linköping UniversityLinköpingSweden
  2. 2.FMVZ, Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Health, School of Veterinary Medicine and Animal ScienceCenter for Comparative Studies in Sustainability, Health and Welfare, University of São Paulo - USP - São Paulo StatePirassunungaBrazil

Personalised recommendations