Skip to main content

The Role of Structural Criteria in Transitions Theory: A Focus on Organisms

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Evolution and Transitions in Complexity

Abstract

The Major Evolutionary Transitions theory of Szathmáry and Maynard Smith is famous for its contribution to the understanding of complex wholes in biology. Typical for Major Evolutionary Transitions theory is the select use of functional criteria, notably, cooperation, competition reduction and reproduction as part of a larger unit. When using such functional criteria, any group of attached cells can be viewed as multicellular, such as a plant or the slug-shaped aggregation of cells of a slime mould. In addition, one could also have used structural criteria to arrive at the conclusion that the cells in the slug of a slime mould are attached without plasma strands, while the cells of a plant are attached and connected through plasma strands. A theory which in addition to functional criteria also uses structural criteria for the identification of major transitions is the Operator Theory. Using the Operator Theory one can, for example, conclude that the slug of a slime mould represents a pluricellular organisation because its cells are not connected through plasma strands, while the cells of a plant are connected through plasma strands and for this reason represent a multicellular organism. In this chapter, the relationships between the Major Evolutionary Transitions theory and the Operator Theory are studied with a focus on transitions that lead to organisms.

‘In attempting to distinguish organisms from parts and from groups, authors often list qualities that typify organisms, but usually also recognize the many exceptions to these general patterns. Many such qualities fail as definitional criteria on the grounds that they are necessary for recognizing an organism, but not sufficient because they also are met by many non-organisms’ (Pepper and Herron 2008 ).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alvarez de Lorenzana JM (1993) The constructive universe and the evolutionary systems framework. In: Salthe SN (ed) Development and evolution. Complexity and change in biology. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 291–308, Appendix

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardele CF (1997) On the symbiotic origin of protists, their diversity, and their pivotal role in teaching systematic biology. Ital J Zool 64:107–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonner JT (1974) On development: the biology of form. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth A (2014) Symbiosis, selection, and individuality. Biol Philos. doi:10.1007/s10539-014-9449-8

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouchard F, Huneman P (eds) (2013) From groups to individuals. Evolution and emerging individuality. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourke AFG (2011) Principles of social evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Buss LW (1987) The evolution of individuality. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Calcott B, Sterelny K (eds) (2011) The major transitions in evolution revisited. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright P (2013) Developmental insights into the origin of complex colonial hydrozoans. Integr Comp Biol 43:82–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan CX, Bhattacharya D (2010) The origin of plastids. Nature Educ 3:84

    Google Scholar 

  • Corning PA (1983) The synergism hypothesis. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Corning PA, Szathmáry E (2015) ‘Synergistic selection’: a Darwinian frame for the evolution of complexity. J Theor Biol 371:45–58

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gagat P, Bodył A, Mackiewicz P, Stiller JW (2014) Tertiary plastid endosymbioses in dinoflagellates. In: Löffelhardt W (ed) Endosymbiosis. Springer, Wien, pp 233–290

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Giddings TH, Staehelin LA (1978) Plasma membrane architecture of Anabaena cylindrica: occurrence of microplasmodesmata and changes associated with heterocyst development and the cell cycle. Cytobiology 16:235–249

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey-Smith P (2009) Darwinian populations and natural selection. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey-Smith P (2013) Darwinian individuals. In: Bouchard F, Huneman P (eds) From groups to individuals. Evolution and emerging individuality. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Heylighen F (1990) Relational closure: a mathematical concept for distinction-making and complexity analysis. In: Trappl R (ed) Cybernetics and systems ’90. World Science, Singapore, pp 335–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Jagers op Akkerhuis GAJM (2008) Analysing hierarchy in the organisation of biological and physical systems. Biol Rev 83:1–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jagers op Akkerhuis GAJM (2010a) The Operator Hierarchy, a chain of closures linking matter life and artificial intelligence, Alterra Scientific contributions 34. Alterra, Wageningen

    Google Scholar 

  • Jagers op Akkerhuis GAJM (2010b) Towards a hierarchical definition of life, the organism, and death. Found Sci 15:245–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jagers op Akkerhuis GAJM (2012a) The pursuit of complexity. The utility of biodiversity from an evolutionary perspective. KNNV Publisher, Zeist, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Jagers op Akkerhuis GAJM (2012b) The role of logic and insight in the search for a definition of life. J Biomol Struct Dyn 29:619–620

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jagers op Akkerhuis GAJM (2014) General laws and centripetal science. Eur Rev 22:113–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jagers op Akkerhuis GAJM, van Straalen NM (1999) Operators, the Lego–bricks of nature: evolutionary transitions from fermions to neural networks. World Futures 53:329–345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeling PJ (2010) The endosymbiotic origin, diversification and fate of plastids. Philos Trans R Soc B 365:729–748

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Koestler A (1978) Janus: a summing up. Hutchinson & Co. Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J (1988) Evolutionary progress and the levels of selection. In: Nitecki MH (ed) Evolutionary progress. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 219–230

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J, Szathmáry E (1995) The major transitions in evolution. W.H. Freeman Spektrum, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • McShea DW, Simpson CG (2011) The miscellaneous transitions in evolution. In: Sterelny K (ed) The major transitions in evolution revisited. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller JG (1978) Living systems. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pepper JW, Herron MD (2008) Does biology need an organism concept? Biol Rev 83:621–627

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Queller DC, Strassmann JE (2009) Beyond society: the evolution of organismality. Philos Trans R Soc B 364:3143–3155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salthe S (1985) Evolving hierarchical systems: their structure and representation. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Santelices B (1999) How many kinds of individual are there? Tree 14:152–155

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simon HA (1962) The architecture of complexity. Proc Am Soc Philos Sci 106:467–482

    Google Scholar 

  • Stebbins G (1969) The basis of progressive evolution. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Szathmáry E (2015) Toward major evolutionary transitions theory 2.0. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112:10104–10111

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Szathmáry E, Maynard Smith J (1995) The major evolutionary transitions. Nature 374:227–232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Turchin VE (1977) The phenomenon of science, a cybernetic approach to human evolution. Colombia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Bertalanffy L (1950) An outline of general system theory. Br J Philos Sci 1:134–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West SA, Fisher RM, Gardner A, Kiers ET (2015) Major evolutionary transitions in individuality. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. doi:10.1073/pnas.1421402112

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gerard A. J. M. Jagers op Akkerhuis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jagers op Akkerhuis, G.A.J.M. (2016). The Role of Structural Criteria in Transitions Theory: A Focus on Organisms. In: Jagers op Akkerhuis, G. (eds) Evolution and Transitions in Complexity. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43802-3_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics