Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From DNA- to NA-centrism and the conditions for gene-centrism revisited

  • Published:
Biology & Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

First the ‘Weismann barrier’ and later on Francis Crick’s ‘central dogma’ of molecular biology nourished the gene-centric paradigm of life, i.e., the conception of the gene/genome as a ‘central source’ from which hereditary specificity unidirectionally flows or radiates into cellular biochemistry and development. Today, due to advances in molecular genetics and epigenetics, such as the discovery of complex post-genomic and epigenetic processes in which genes are causally integrated, many theorists argue that a gene-centric conception of the organism has become problematic. Here, we first explore the causal implications of the following two central dogma-related issues: (1) widespread reverse transcription—arguing for an extension from ‘DNA-genome’ to RNA-encompassing ‘NA-genome’ and, thus, from traditional DNA-centrism to a broader ‘NA-centrism’; and (2) the absence of a mechanism of reverse translation—arguing for the ‘structural primacy’ of NA-sequence over protein in cellular biochemistry. Secondly, we explore whether this latter conclusion can be extended to a ‘functional primacy’ of NA-sequence over protein in cellular biochemistry, which would imply a limited kind of ‘gene/NA-centrism’ confined to the subcellular level of NA/protein-based biochemistry. Finally, we explore the conditions—and their (non)fulfilment—for a more generalised form of gene-centrism extendable to higher levels of biological organisation. We conclude that the higher we go in the biological hierarchy, the more dubious gene-centric claims become.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In Woodward’s (2010) terminology, the causal arrow or constraint from genetic NA-sequence to three-dimensional protein-structure is characterised by a relative “stability” (cf. our ‘reliability’) and “specificity” (cf. our ‘co-variance’). .

  2. We thank an anonymous reviewer for drawing our attention to this.

  3. Again in Woodward’s (2010) terminology, the causal arrow or constraint from protein-structure to protein-function is characterised by a relative “stability” and “specificity”.

  4. Again, using Woodward’s (2010) framework, the causal arrow or constraint from genetic NA-sequence to protein-function is characterised by a relative “stability” (cf. our ‘reliability’) and “specificity” (cf. our ‘co-variance’).

  5. See previous section.

  6. Cf. Woodward’s (2010) ‘stability’ and ‘specificity’.

  7. That is, the attention that both Dawkins (1982, 2004) and Haig (2007) devote to argue for a co-variational constraint from genes on phenotypes and not the other (‘Lamarckian’) way around.

  8. Reviewed in the section on “The absence of a mechanism of reverse translation”.

References

  • Baranov PV, Gurvich OL, Hammer AW, Gesteland RF, Atkins JF (2003) RECODE 2003. Nucleic Acids Res 31:87–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brennicke A, Marchfelder A, Binder S (1999) RNA editing. FEMS Microbiol Rev 23:297–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosius J (1999) RNAs from all categories generate retrosequences that may be exapted as novel genes or regulatory elements. Gene 238:115–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosius J (2003) The contribution of RNAs and retroposition to evolutionary novelties. Genetica 118:99–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cairns-Smith AG (1985) Seven clues to the origin of life. Cambridge University Press, Canto

    Google Scholar 

  • Callebaut W, Rasskin-Gutman D (eds) (2005) Modularity: understanding the development and evolution of natural complex systems. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Callebaut W, Müller GB, Newman SA (2007) The organismic systems approach: EvoDevo and the streamlining of the naturalistic agenda. In: Sansom R, Brandon R (eds) Integrating evolution and development: from theory to practice. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 25–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Crick F (1958) On protein synthesis. Sympos Soc Exp Biol 12:138–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Crick F (1970) Central dogma of molecular biology. Nature 227:561–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins R (1982) The extended phenotype. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins R (2004) Extended phenotype: but not too extended. A reply to Laland, Turner and Jablonka. Biol Philos 19:377–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Backer P, De Waele D, Van Speybroeck L (2010) Ins and outs of systems biology vis-à-vis molecular biology: continuation or clear cut? Acta Biotheor 58:15–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert SF, Opitz JM, Raff RA (1996) Resynthesizing evolutionary and developmental biology. Dev Biol 173:357–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey-Smith P (2007) Is it a revolution? Biol Philos 22:429–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodman MF (2002) Error-prone repair DNA polymerases in prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Ann Rev Biochem 71:17–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould SJ (2002) The structure of evolutionary theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Griesemer J (2000) The units of evolutionary transition. Selection 1:67–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griesemer J (2002) What is “epi” about epigenetics? Ann NY Acad Sci 981:97–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griesemer J (2005) The informational gene and the substantial body: On the generalization of evolutionary theory by abstraction. In: Jones MR, Cartwright N (eds) Idealization XII: correcting the model. Idealization and abstraction in the sciences (Poznan studies in the philosophy of sciences and the humanities, vol 86. Rodopi, Amsterdam, pp 59–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Haig D (2004) The (dual) origin of epigenetics. Cold Spring Harbor Symp Quant Biol 69:67–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haig D (2007) Weismann rules! OK? Epigenetics and the Lamarckian temptation. Biol Philos 22:415–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halfmann R, Jarosz DF, Jones SK, Chang A, Lancaster AK, Lindquist S (2012) Prions are a common mechanism for phenotypic inheritance in wild yeasts. Nature 482:363–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall BK (2003) Unlocking the black box between genotype and phenotype: cell condensations as morphogenetic (modular) units. Biol Philos 18:219–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holliday R (1990) Mechanisms for the control of gene activity during development. Biol Rev 65:431–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium (2001) Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature 409:860–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jablonka E, Lamb M (1995) Epigenetic inheritance and evolution: the Lamarckian dimension. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Jablonka E, Lamb M (2005) Evolution in four dimensions: genetic, epigenetic, behavioral, and symbolic variation in the history of life. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Jablonka E, Raz G (2009) Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance: prevalence, mechanisms, and implications for the study of heredity and evolution. Q Rev Biol 84:131–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller EF (2000) The century of the gene. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoop V (2011) When you can’t trust the DNA: RNA editing changes transcript sequences. Cell Mol Life Sci 68:567–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koonin EV (2012) Does the central dogma still stand? Biol Direct 7:27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Law JA, Jacobsen SE (2010) Establishing, maintaining and modifying DNA methylation patterns in plants and animals. Nat Rev Genet 11:204–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maas S, Rich A (2000) Changing genetic information through RNA editing. BioEssays 22:790–802

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maydanovych O, Beal PA (2006) Breaking the central dogma by RNA editing. Chem Rev 106(8):3397–3411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J (1993) The theory of evolution. Cambridge University Press, Canto

    Google Scholar 

  • Maynard Smith J (2000) The concept of information in biology. Philos Sci 67:177–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medina M (2005) Genomes, phylogeny, and evolutionary systems biology. PNAS 102:6630–6635

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss L (2003) What genes can’t do. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann-Held EM, Rehmann-Sutter C (eds) (2006) Genes in development: re-reading the molecular paradigm. Duke University Press, Durham

    Google Scholar 

  • Noble D (2008) Genes and causation. Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci 366:3001–3015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noble D (2011) Neo-Darwinism, the modern synthesis, and selfish genes: are they of use in physiology? J Physiol 589:1007–1015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odling-Smee J, Laland KN (2011) Ecological inheritance and cultural inheritance: what are they and how do they differ? Biol Theory 6:220–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oyama S (1985) The ontogeny of information: developmental systems and evolution. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Oyama S, Griffiths PE, Gray RD (eds) (2001) Cycles of contingency: developmental systems and evolution. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Rando OJ, Verstrepen KJ (2007) Timescales of genetic and epigenetic inheritance. Cell 128:655–668

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards EJ (2006) Inherited epigenetic variation: revisiting soft inheritance. Nat Rev Genet 7:395–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards CL, Bossdorf O, Pigliucci M (2010) What role does heritable epigenetic variation play in phenotypic evolution? Bioscience 60:232–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S (2000) Information in genetics and developmental biology: comments on Maynard Smith. Philos Sci 67:208–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar S (2005) Molecular models of life: philosophical papers on molecular biology. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro JA (2009) Revisiting the central dogma in the 21st century. Natural genetic engineering and natural genome editing. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1178:6–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro JA (2011) Evolution: a view from the 21st century. FT Press Science, Upper Saddle River, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharp PA (1994) Split genes and RNA splicing. Cell 77:805–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stotz K (2006a) Molecular epigenesis: distributed specificity as a break in the central dogma. Hist Philos Life Sci 28:527–544

    Google Scholar 

  • Stotz K (2006b) With ‘genes’ like that, who needs an environment? Postgenomics’ argument for the ‘ontogeny of information’. Philos Sci 73:905–917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Temin HM (1985) Reverse transcription in the eukaryotic genome: retroviruses, pararetroviruses, retrotransposons, and retrotranscripts. Mol Biol Evol 2:455–468

    Google Scholar 

  • Temin HM, Mizutani S (1970) RNA-dependent DNA polymerase in virions of Rous sarcoma virus. Nature 226:1211–1213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thieffry D, Sarkar S (1998) Forty years under the central dogma. TiBS 23:312–316

    Google Scholar 

  • True HL, Berlin I, Lindquist S (2004) Epigenetic regulation of translation reveals hidden genetic variation to produce complex traits. Nature 431:184–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weismann A (1889) Essays upon heredity and kindred biological problems, vol 1. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Weismann A (1893a) The germ-plasm: a theory of heredity (trans: Parker WN, Rönnfeldt H). Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York

  • Weismann A (1893b) The all-sufficiency of natural selection: a reply to Herbert Spencer. Contemp Rev 64:309–338

    Google Scholar 

  • Weismann A (1904) The evolution theory (trans: Thomson JA, Thomson M). Edward Arnold, London

  • Wilkins A (2011) Epigenetic inheritance: where does the field stand today? What do we still need to know? In: Gissis SB, Jablonka E (eds) Transformations of Lamarckism: from subtle fluids to molecular biology. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 389–393

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Winther RG (2001) August Weismann on germ-plasm variation. J Hist Biol 34:517–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward J (2010) Causation in biology: stability, specificity, and the choice of levels of explanation. Biol Philos 25:287–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu T, Wang J, Changning L et al (2006) NPInter: the noncoding RNAs and protein related biomacromolecules interaction database. Nucleic Acids Res 34:D150–D152

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to an anonymous reviewer for extensive comments on an earlier version of the paper, to Kim Sterelny for additional comments and suggestions, and to Linda Van Speybroeck for both constructive criticism and support during previous stages of the paper. Preparation of the manuscript was made possible by the Special Research Fund (BOF), Ghent University (Project Number: B/11196/02) and by the Fund for Scientific Research Flanders (FWO), Belgium (Project Number: G001013N).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy and Moral Science, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, 9000, Ghent, Belgium

    Alexis De Tiège, Koen Tanghe & Johan Braeckman

  2. Department of Plant Systems Biology, VIB, Technologiepark 927, 9052, Ghent, Belgium

    Yves Van de Peer

  3. Department of Plant Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, Ghent University, 9052, Ghent, Belgium

    Yves Van de Peer

Authors
  1. Alexis De Tiège
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Koen Tanghe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Johan Braeckman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yves Van de Peer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexis De Tiège.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

De Tiège, A., Tanghe, K., Braeckman, J. et al. From DNA- to NA-centrism and the conditions for gene-centrism revisited. Biol Philos 29, 55–69 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-013-9393-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-013-9393-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation