RECORD
Understanding bias in the introduction of variation as an evolutionary cause
Populations and Evolution · Submitted 15 May 2018
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim That is, the characteristic concerns of molecular evolution, evo-devo and structuralism can be interpreted to implicate a kind of causation absent from the original Modern Synthesis.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
Our understanding of evolution is shaped strongly by how we conceive of its fundamental causes. In the original Modern Synthesis, evolution was defined as a process of shifting the frequencies of available alleles at many loci affecting a trait under selection. Events of mutation that introduce novelty were not considered evolutionary causes, but proximate causes acting at the wrong level. Today it is clear that long-term evolutionary dynamics depend on the dynamics of mutational introduction. Yet, the implications of this dependency remain unfamiliar, and have not yet penetrated into high-level debates over evolutionary theory. Modeling the influence of biases in the introduction process reveals behavior previously unimagined, as well as behavior previously considered impossible. Quantitative biases in the introduction of variation can impose biases on the outcome of evolution without requiring high mutation rates or neutral evolution. Mutation-biased adaptation, a possibility not previously imagined, has been observed among diverse taxa. Directional trends are possible under a sustained bias. Biases that are developmental in origin may have an effect analogous to mutational biases. Structuralist arguments invoking the relative accessibility of forms in state-space can be understood as references to the role of biases in the introduction of variation. That is, the characteristic concerns of molecular evolution, evo-devo and structuralism can be interpreted to implicate a kind of causation absent from the original Modern Synthesis.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | Our understanding of evolution is shaped strongly by how we conceive of its fundamental causes. | background 1.00 | 0.05 | 0.03 | asserted 1.00 |
| s1 | In the original Modern Synthesis, evolution was defined as a process of shifting the frequencies of available alleles at many loci affecting a trait under selection. | background 1.00 | 0.03 | 0.03 | asserted 1.00 |
| s2 | Events of mutation that introduce novelty were not considered evolutionary causes, but proximate causes acting at the wrong level. | background 0.99 | 0.03 | 0.04 | asserted 1.00 |
| s3 | Today it is clear that long-term evolutionary dynamics depend on the dynamics of mutational introduction. | background 0.94 | 0.06 | 0.14 | asserted 1.00 |
| s4 | Yet, the implications of this dependency remain unfamiliar, and have not yet penetrated into high-level debates over evolutionary theory. | gap 0.99 | 0.06 | 0.05 | asserted 1.00 |
| s5 | Modeling the influence of biases in the introduction process reveals behavior previously unimagined, as well as behavior previously considered impossible. | contribution 0.51 | 0.45 | 0.26 | asserted 1.00 |
| s6 | Quantitative biases in the introduction of variation can impose biases on the outcome of evolution without requiring high mutation rates or neutral evolution. | result 0.82 | 0.36 | 0.50 | asserted 0.88 |
| s7 | Mutation-biased adaptation, a possibility not previously imagined, has been observed among diverse taxa. | result 0.82 | 0.16 | 0.15 | asserted 0.99 |
| s8 | Directional trends are possible under a sustained bias. | result 0.81 | 0.20 | 0.12 | hedged possibility 0.86 |
| s9 | Biases that are developmental in origin may have an effect analogous to mutational biases. | interpretation 0.75 | 0.11 | 0.06 | hedged possibility 1.00 |
| s10 | Structuralist arguments invoking the relative accessibility of forms in state-space can be understood as references to the role of biases in the introduction of variation. | interpretation 0.96 | 0.13 | 0.14 | hedged possibility 0.60 |
| s11 | That is, the characteristic concerns of molecular evolution, evo-devo and structuralism can be interpreted to implicate a kind of causation absent from the original Modern Synthesis. | interpretation 0.99 | 0.24 | 0.61 | hedged possibility 0.57 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v1
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
Our understanding of evolution is shaped strongly by how we conceive of its fundamental causes. In the original Modern Synthesis, evolution was defined as a process of shifting the frequencies of available alleles at many loci affecting a trait under selection. Events of mutation that introduce novelty were not considered evolutionary causes, but proximate causes acting at the wrong level. Today it is clear that long-term evolutionary dynamics depend on the dynamics of mutational introduction. Yet, the implications of this dependency remain unfamiliar, and have not yet penetrated into high-level debates over evolutionary theory. Modeling the influence of biases in the introduction process reveals behavior previously unimagined, as well as behavior previously considered impossible. Quantitative biases in the introduction of variation can impose biases on the outcome of evolution without requiring high mutation rates or neutral evolution. Mutation-biased adaptation, a possibility not previously imagined, has been observed among diverse taxa. Directional trends are possible under a sustained bias. Biases that are developmental in origin may have an effect analogous to mutational biases. Structuralist arguments invoking the relative accessibility of forms in state-space can be understood as references to the role of biases in the introduction of variation. That is, the characteristic concerns of molecular evolution, evo-devo and structuralism can be interpreted to implicate a kind of causation absent from the original Modern Synthesis.
Human review
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.