Cargando…
The “New Synthesis”
When Mendel’s work was rediscovered in 1900, and extended to establish classical genetics, it was initially seen in opposition to Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection on continuous variation, as represented by the biometric research program that was the foundation of quantitative geneti...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
National Academy of Sciences
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9335343/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35858408 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2122147119 |
_version_ | 1784759317884305408 |
---|---|
author | Barton, Nicholas H. |
author_facet | Barton, Nicholas H. |
author_sort | Barton, Nicholas H. |
collection | PubMed |
description | When Mendel’s work was rediscovered in 1900, and extended to establish classical genetics, it was initially seen in opposition to Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection on continuous variation, as represented by the biometric research program that was the foundation of quantitative genetics. As Fisher, Haldane, and Wright established a century ago, Mendelian inheritance is exactly what is needed for natural selection to work efficiently. Yet, the synthesis remains unfinished. We do not understand why sexual reproduction and a fair meiosis predominate in eukaryotes, or how far these are responsible for their diversity and complexity. Moreover, although quantitative geneticists have long known that adaptive variation is highly polygenic, and that this is essential for efficient selection, this is only now becoming appreciated by molecular biologists—and we still do not have a good framework for understanding polygenic variation or diffuse function. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9335343 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | National Academy of Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-93353432022-07-30 The “New Synthesis” Barton, Nicholas H. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Perspective When Mendel’s work was rediscovered in 1900, and extended to establish classical genetics, it was initially seen in opposition to Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection on continuous variation, as represented by the biometric research program that was the foundation of quantitative genetics. As Fisher, Haldane, and Wright established a century ago, Mendelian inheritance is exactly what is needed for natural selection to work efficiently. Yet, the synthesis remains unfinished. We do not understand why sexual reproduction and a fair meiosis predominate in eukaryotes, or how far these are responsible for their diversity and complexity. Moreover, although quantitative geneticists have long known that adaptive variation is highly polygenic, and that this is essential for efficient selection, this is only now becoming appreciated by molecular biologists—and we still do not have a good framework for understanding polygenic variation or diffuse function. National Academy of Sciences 2022-07-18 2022-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC9335343/ /pubmed/35858408 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2122147119 Text en Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by PNAS. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This open access article is distributed under Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Perspective Barton, Nicholas H. The “New Synthesis” |
title | The “New Synthesis” |
title_full | The “New Synthesis” |
title_fullStr | The “New Synthesis” |
title_full_unstemmed | The “New Synthesis” |
title_short | The “New Synthesis” |
title_sort | “new synthesis” |
topic | Perspective |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9335343/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35858408 http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2122147119 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bartonnicholash thenewsynthesis AT bartonnicholash newsynthesis |