Evolution beyond neo-Darwinism: a new conceptual framework

Abstract

There was an error published in J. Exp. Biol. 218, 7-13.The quotation from a Nature 2010 editorial on page 10 of the article does not appear in the final published version of the editorial. The correct quotation is given below.'But for all the intellectual ferment of the past decade, has human health truly benefited from the sequencing of the human genome? A startlingly honest response can be found on pages 674 and 676, where the leaders of the public and private efforts, Francis Collins and Craig Venter, both say "not much".'We apologise for any inconvenience this may have caused. 1273

Neo-Darwinism is just fine

“…This correspondence on my article (Noble, 2015) is very welcome since it accepts the main point I made in relation to epigenetics and evolution. Williams and I therefore agree that 'recent observations reveal multiple generations sharing the parent's environmentally induced phenotype, even in the absence of the original factor'.…”

“…Denis Noble argues 'that the Modern Synthesis (neo-Darwinist) theory of evolution requires either extension or replacement' (Noble, 2015a) and a Correction amended his quotation from a Nature 2010 editorial (Noble, 2015b). That Correction helps us appreciate the potential problems when citing pre-print editions, but Noble implies that this Nature 2010 editorial and its two inclusive essays by Francis Collins and Craig Venter support his call for either an extension or replacement of neo-Darwinist theory.…”

Systems genomics analysis centered on epigenetic inheritance supports development of a unified theory of biology

“…Nevertheless, the present results tend to unify environment, physiology, RNA, gene networks, DNA methylation and histone modifications with inheritance, development, disease and evolution. A potential role and integration of physiology, epigenetics, RNA and genetic interactions in inheritance and evolution have previously been suggested and sought for on the basis of theoretical considerations (Richards, 2008;Day and Bonduriansky, 2011;Hunter et al, 2012;Livnat, 2013;Noble, 2013Noble, , 2015Noble et al, 2014;Rivoire and Leibler, 2014;Jablonka and Lamb, 2015;Morris, 2015;Skinner, 2015). The data analysis presented here offers a proof of principle for a unified theory of biology.…”

“…Because of the inability of contemporary gene and natural selection centric evolutionary theory to fully explain heritability of phenotypic traits based solely on DNA sequence variation on the one hand, and increasing evidence of non-genetic inheritance on the other, there is a profound interest in integrating epigenetics, molecular biology, genomic networks, and physiology with the theory of evolution (Petronis, 2010;Danchin et al, 2011;Mattick, 2012;Ball, 2013;Noble, 2013Noble, , 2015Noble et al, 2014). A topdown approach toward this unification may begin with developing a broad conceptual mechanistic framework and testing that in a proofof-concept analysis using empirical data.…”

Towards an Agile Biodigital Architecture: Supporting a Dynamic Evolutionary and Developmental View of Architecture

“…Some of these methods are based on biological principles [1][2][3], and as evolutionary theories in biology are radically revised [4,5], the terminology in this context needs to be revisited to include novel biological concepts. Biomimetics provides methods to communicate the conceptual base from biology into design and has promoted novel approaches to architectural design [6].…”