Evolution, Complexity, and Life History Theory.

IF 1.9 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Biological theory Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-14 DOI:10.1007/s13752-024-00487-z
Walter Veit, Samuel J L Gascoigne, Roberto Salguero-Gómez
{"title":"Evolution, Complexity, and Life History Theory.","authors":"Walter Veit, Samuel J L Gascoigne, Roberto Salguero-Gómez","doi":"10.1007/s13752-024-00487-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this article, we revisit the longstanding debate of whether there is a pattern in the evolution of organisms towards greater complexity, and how this hypothesis could be tested using an interdisciplinary lens. We argue that this debate remains alive today due to the lack of a quantitative measure of complexity that is related to the teleonomic (i.e., goal-directed) nature of living systems. Further, we argue that such a biological measure of complexity can indeed be found in the vast literature produced within life history theory. We propose that an ideal method to quantify this complexity lies within life history strategies (i.e., schedules of survival and reproduction across an organism's life cycle), as it is precisely these strategies that are under selection to optimize the organism's fitness. In this context, we set an agenda for future steps: (1) how this complexity can be measured mathematically, and (2) how we can engage in a comparative analysis of this complexity across species to investigate the evolutionary forces driving increases or, for that matter, decreases in teleonomic complexity.</p>","PeriodicalId":72374,"journal":{"name":"Biological theory","volume":"20 3","pages":"212-221"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12380943/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-024-00487-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, we revisit the longstanding debate of whether there is a pattern in the evolution of organisms towards greater complexity, and how this hypothesis could be tested using an interdisciplinary lens. We argue that this debate remains alive today due to the lack of a quantitative measure of complexity that is related to the teleonomic (i.e., goal-directed) nature of living systems. Further, we argue that such a biological measure of complexity can indeed be found in the vast literature produced within life history theory. We propose that an ideal method to quantify this complexity lies within life history strategies (i.e., schedules of survival and reproduction across an organism's life cycle), as it is precisely these strategies that are under selection to optimize the organism's fitness. In this context, we set an agenda for future steps: (1) how this complexity can be measured mathematically, and (2) how we can engage in a comparative analysis of this complexity across species to investigate the evolutionary forces driving increases or, for that matter, decreases in teleonomic complexity.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

进化、复杂性和生命史理论。
在这篇文章中,我们重新审视了长期以来关于生物向更复杂的进化是否存在一种模式的争论,以及如何使用跨学科的视角来检验这一假设。我们认为,由于缺乏与生命系统的目的论(即目标导向)性质相关的复杂性的定量衡量,这种争论今天仍然存在。此外,我们认为这种复杂性的生物学度量确实可以在生命史理论中产生的大量文献中找到。我们提出,量化这种复杂性的理想方法在于生活史策略(即生物体生命周期中的生存和繁殖时间表),因为正是这些策略在选择下优化生物体的适应性。在这种背景下,我们为未来的步骤设定了一个议程:(1)如何用数学方法测量这种复杂性,以及(2)我们如何对物种间的这种复杂性进行比较分析,以研究驱动teleonomic复杂性增加或减少的进化力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信