Convergence and parallelism reconsidered: what have we learned about the genetics of adaptation?

Department of Biology, University of California - Riverside, 900 University Avenue, Riverside CA 92521, USA. <>
Trends in Ecology & Evolution (Impact Factor: 15.35). 02/2008; 23(1):26-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2007.09.011
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Biologists often distinguish 'convergent' from 'parallel' evolution. This distinction usually assumes that when a given phenotype evolves, the underlying genetic mechanisms are different in distantly related species (convergent) but similar in closely related species (parallel). However, several examples show that the same phenotype might evolve among populations within a species by changes in different genes. Conversely, similar phenotypes might evolve in distantly related species by changes in the same gene. We thus argue that the distinction between 'convergent' and 'parallel' evolution is a false dichotomy, at best representing ends of a continuum. We can simplify our vocabulary; all instances of the independent evolution of a given phenotype can be described with a single term - convergent.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The different manifestations of equivalence and similarity in structure throughout evolution suggest a continuous and hierarchical process that starts out with the origin of a morphological novelty, unit, or homologue. Once a morphological unit has originated, its properties change subsequently into variants that differ, in magnitude, from the original properties found in the common ancestor. We will look into the nature of morphological units and their degrees of modification, which will provide the starting point for restructuring the concept of "homology," keeping the use of homology as the identity of an anatomical part, and homogeny, as the specific variation of that anatomical part during evolution. We will also show that parallelism has a distinct placement within an evolutionary continuum between homology and homoplasy, whereas the phenomenon of evolutionary convergence is left outside this continuum. We will then provide some epistemological and developmental criteria to justify these distinctions, showing that there is a direct relation between the nature of these concepts and the constraints that developmental mechanisms impose on evolution. Finally, we will propose a hierarchical model that places homology, homogeny, homoplasy, and parallelism, as distinct phenomena within an evolutionary continuum. J. Exp. Zool. (Mol. Dev. Evol.) 00B: 1-13, 2015. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B Molecular and Developmental Evolution 03/2015; 324(2):91-103. DOI:10.1002/jez.b.22605 · 2.12 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Extremophile fishes have emerged as veritable models for investigations in integrative biology. They not only provide insights into biochemical, physiological, and developmental processes that govern life, but also allow for the elucidation of life’s capacities and limitations to adapt to extreme environmental conditions. Over the past decades, researchers have made substantial progress towards understanding mechanisms underlying adaptation to extreme conditions mediated through a wide variety of physicochemical stressors. This chapter reviews some of the common themes and approaches used in the investigation of extremophiles and highlights several of the major open questions in this field: (1) Why do fish colonize extreme environments? (2) How can we gain an understanding of the mechanistic links between genomes and fitness of extremophiles in their natural environment? (3) How common is convergent evolution in extreme environments? (4) How do physicochemical stressors shape macroevolutionary processes? (5) How does acknowledging environmental and organismal complexity change our knowledge of evolution in extreme environments? Finally, (6) how can we make basic research on extremophiles applicable to solving major scientific challenges of our time and the coming decades?
    Extremophile Fishes: Ecology, Evolution, and Physiology of Teleosts in Extreme Environments, Edited by Rüdiger Riesch, Michael Tobler, Martin Plath, 12/2014: chapter 12: pages 279-296; Springer., ISBN: 978-3-319-13361-4
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: An area of great interest in evolutionary genomics is whether convergently evolved traits are the result of convergent molecular mechanisms. The presence of queen and worker castes in insect societies is a spectacular example of convergent evolution and phenotypic plasticity. Multiple insect lineages have evolved environmentally induced alternative castes. Given multiple origins of eusociality in Hymenoptera (bees, ants, and wasps), it has been proposed that insect castes evolved from common genetic “toolkits” consisting of deeply conserved genes. Here, we combine data from previously published studies on fire ants and honey bees with new data for Polistes metricus paper wasps to assess the toolkit idea by presenting the first comparative transcriptome-wide analysis of caste determination among three major hymenopteran social lineages. Overall, we found few shared caste differentially expressed transcripts across the three social lineages. However, there is substantially more overlap at the levels of pathways and biological functions. Thus, there are shared elements but not on the level of specific genes. Instead, the toolkit appears to be relatively “loose,” that is, different lineages show convergent molecular evolution involving similar metabolic pathways and molecular functions but not the exact same genes. Additionally, our paper wasp data do not support a complementary hypothesis that “novel” taxonomically restricted genes are related to caste differences.
    Molecular Biology and Evolution 01/2015; 32:690-703. · 14.31 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

Available from
Jun 4, 2014