Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T09:17:42.705Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Neutral Spaces and Topological Explanations in Evolutionary Biology: Lessons from Some Landscapes and Mappings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Philippe Huneman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I consider recent uses of the notion of neutrality in evolutionary biology and ecology, questioning their relevance to the kind of explanation recently labeled ‘topological explanation’. Focusing on fitness landscapes and genotype-phenotype maps, I explore the explanatory uses of neutral subspaces, as modeled in two perspectives: hyperdimensional fitness landscapes and RNA sequence-structure maps. I argue that topological properties of such spaces account for features of evolutionary systems: respectively, capacity for adaptive evolution toward global optima and mutational robustness of genotypes. Thus many models appealing to “neutral” manifolds provide topological alternatives to hypothetical mechanisms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 85 , Issue 5 , December 2018 , pp. 969 - 983
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

I am grateful to the audience of the PSA Symposium “Integrating Explanatory Strategies across the Life Sciences” and especially to cosymposiasts Marta Bertolaso, Nick Jones, and Anya Plutynski for their invaluable contribution to my understanding of issues raised in the article. I also thank Carl Craver, Hugh Desmond, Daniel Kostic, Stuart Glennan, Marc Lange, and Rasmus Winther for their insightful critiques and comments. This work was funded by the ANR grant Explabio ANR—13-BSH3-0007 and the LIA CNRS ECIEB.

References

Birch, J. 2016. “Natural Selection and the Maximization of Fitness.” Biological Review 91 (3): 711–23..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coyne, R., Barton, N. H., and Turelli, M.. 1997. “Perspective: A Critique of Sewall Wright’s Shifting Balance Theory of Evolution.” Evolution 51:643–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Craver, C., and Darden, L.. 2013. In Search for Mechanisms: Discovery across the Life Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crow, J. 1987. “Neutral Models of Molecular Evolution.” In Neutral Models in Biology, ed. Nitecki, M. and Hoffman, A., 11–25. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Frank, S. 2012. “Wright’s Adaptive Landscape versus Fisher’s Fundamental Theorem.” In The Adaptive Landscape in Evolutionary Biology, ed. Svensson, E. I. and Calsbeek, R., 41–58. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gavrilets, S. 1997. “Evolution and Speciation on Holey Adaptive Landscapes.” Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12:307–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gavrilets, S. 1999. “A Dynamical Theory of Speciation on Holey Adaptive Landscapes.” American Naturalist 154:1–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gillespie, J. H. 2004. Population Genetics: A Concise Guide. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Gross, J. L., and Tucker, T. W.. 1987. Topological Graph Theory. Reading, MA: Wiley.Google Scholar
Hubbell, S. P. 2001. The Unified Neutral Theory of Biodiversity and Biogeography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Huneman, P. 2010. “Topological Explanations and Robustness in Biological Sciences.” Synthese 177 (2): 213–45..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huneman, P. 2018. “Outlines of a Theory of Structural Explanations.” Philosophical Studies 175 (3): 665–702..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, N. 2014. “Bowtie Structures, Pathway Diagrams, and Topological Explanation.” Erkenntnis 79:1135–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kimura, M. 1983. The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lange, M. 2013. “Really Statistical Explanations and Genetic Drift.” Philosophy of Science 80 (2): 169–88..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. 1973. “Causation.” Journal of Philosophy 70:556–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewontin, R. 1974. The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Matthen, M., and Ariew, A.. 2002. “Two Ways of Thinking about Natural Selection.” Journal of Philosophy 49 (2): 55–83..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGill, B. J., Maurer, B. A., and Weiser, M. D.. 2006. “Empirical Evaluation of Neutral Theory.” Ecology 87:1411–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Millstein, R. 2002. “Are Random Drift and Natural Selection Conceptually Distinct?” Biology and Philosophy 17 (1): 33–53..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plutynski, A. 2007. “Drift: A Historical and Conceptual Overview.” Biological Theory 2 (2): 156–67..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Potochnik, A. 2009. “Optimality Modeling in a Suboptimal World.” Biology and Philosophy 24 (2): 183–97..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, G. R. 1972. “Fisher’s Fundamental Theorem Made Clear.” Annals of Human Genetics 36:129–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rice, C. 2012. “Optimality Explanations: A Plea for an Alternative Approach.” Biology and Philosophy 27 (5): 685–703..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stadler, B., Stadler, P., Wagner, G., and Fontana, W.. 2001. “The Topology of the Possible: Formal Spaces Underlying Patterns of Evolutionary Change.” Journal of Theoretical Biology 213 (2): 241–74..CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van Nimwegen, E., Crutchfield, J., and Huynen, M.. 1999. “Neutral Evolution of Mutational Robustness.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 96 (17): 9716–20..CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winther, R. 2018. When Maps Become the World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Woodward, J. 2003. Making Things Happen. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wright, S. 1931. “Evolution in Mendelian Populations.” Genetics 16:97–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed