Evolutionary construction by staying together and coming together

Corina E. Tarnita; Clifford H. Taubes; Martin A. Nowak

doi:10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.11.022

Evolutionary construction by staying together and coming together

Corina E. Tarnita, Clifford H. Taubes, Martin A. Nowak

Princeton University

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

53 Scopus citations

Abstract

The evolutionary trajectory of life on earth is one of increasing size and complexity. Yet the standard equations of evolutionary dynamics describe mutation and selection among similar organisms that compete on the same level of organization. Here we begin to outline a mathematical theory that might help to explore how evolution can be constructive, how natural selection can lead from lower to higher levels of organization. We distinguish two fundamental operations, which we call 'staying together' and 'coming together'. Staying together means that individuals form larger units by not separating after reproduction, while coming together means that independent individuals form aggregates. Staying together can lead to specialization and division of labor, but the developmental program must evolve in the basic unit. Coming together can be creative by combining units with different properties. Both operations have been identified in the context of multicellularity, but they have been treated very similarly. Here we point out that staying together and coming together can be found at every level of biological construction and moreover that they face different evolutionary problems. The distinction is particularly clear in the context of cooperation and defection. For staying together the stability of cooperation takes the form of a developmental error threshold, while coming together leads to evolutionary games and requires a mechanism for the evolution of cooperation. We use our models to discuss simple aspects of the evolution of protocells, eukarya, multi-cellularity and animal societies.

Original language	American English
Pages (from-to)	10-22
Number of pages	13
Journal	Journal of Theoretical Biology
Volume	320
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.11.022
State	Published - Mar 7 2013

ASJC Scopus subject areas

General Immunology and Microbiology
Applied Mathematics
General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
General Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Statistics and Probability
Modeling and Simulation

Keywords

Complexity
Evolutionary game theory
Multicellularity

Access to Document

10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.11.022

Cite this

@article{67d100790e854af494dc6d7f153930b2,

title = "Evolutionary construction by staying together and coming together",

abstract = "The evolutionary trajectory of life on earth is one of increasing size and complexity. Yet the standard equations of evolutionary dynamics describe mutation and selection among similar organisms that compete on the same level of organization. Here we begin to outline a mathematical theory that might help to explore how evolution can be constructive, how natural selection can lead from lower to higher levels of organization. We distinguish two fundamental operations, which we call 'staying together' and 'coming together'. Staying together means that individuals form larger units by not separating after reproduction, while coming together means that independent individuals form aggregates. Staying together can lead to specialization and division of labor, but the developmental program must evolve in the basic unit. Coming together can be creative by combining units with different properties. Both operations have been identified in the context of multicellularity, but they have been treated very similarly. Here we point out that staying together and coming together can be found at every level of biological construction and moreover that they face different evolutionary problems. The distinction is particularly clear in the context of cooperation and defection. For staying together the stability of cooperation takes the form of a developmental error threshold, while coming together leads to evolutionary games and requires a mechanism for the evolution of cooperation. We use our models to discuss simple aspects of the evolution of protocells, eukarya, multi-cellularity and animal societies.",

keywords = "Complexity, Evolutionary game theory, Multicellularity",

author = "Tarnita, {Corina E.} and Taubes, {Clifford H.} and Nowak, {Martin A.}",

note = "Funding Information: We are indebted to Julien Ayroles, Nicole King, Sarah Kocher, Roberto Kolter, Richard M. Losick, Richard E. Michod, Robert M. Pringle and David Smyth for valuable discussions and comments which have significantly improved our manuscript. Support from the John Templeton Foundation and the NSF/NIH joint program in mathematical biology (NIH Grant R01GM078986 ) is gratefully acknowledged.",

year = "2013",

month = mar,

day = "7",

doi = "10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.11.022",

language = "American English",

volume = "320",

pages = "10--22",

journal = "Journal of Theoretical Biology",

issn = "0022-5193",

publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Evolutionary construction by staying together and coming together

AU - Tarnita, Corina E.

AU - Taubes, Clifford H.

AU - Nowak, Martin A.

N1 - Funding Information: We are indebted to Julien Ayroles, Nicole King, Sarah Kocher, Roberto Kolter, Richard M. Losick, Richard E. Michod, Robert M. Pringle and David Smyth for valuable discussions and comments which have significantly improved our manuscript. Support from the John Templeton Foundation and the NSF/NIH joint program in mathematical biology (NIH Grant R01GM078986 ) is gratefully acknowledged.

PY - 2013/3/7

Y1 - 2013/3/7

N2 - The evolutionary trajectory of life on earth is one of increasing size and complexity. Yet the standard equations of evolutionary dynamics describe mutation and selection among similar organisms that compete on the same level of organization. Here we begin to outline a mathematical theory that might help to explore how evolution can be constructive, how natural selection can lead from lower to higher levels of organization. We distinguish two fundamental operations, which we call 'staying together' and 'coming together'. Staying together means that individuals form larger units by not separating after reproduction, while coming together means that independent individuals form aggregates. Staying together can lead to specialization and division of labor, but the developmental program must evolve in the basic unit. Coming together can be creative by combining units with different properties. Both operations have been identified in the context of multicellularity, but they have been treated very similarly. Here we point out that staying together and coming together can be found at every level of biological construction and moreover that they face different evolutionary problems. The distinction is particularly clear in the context of cooperation and defection. For staying together the stability of cooperation takes the form of a developmental error threshold, while coming together leads to evolutionary games and requires a mechanism for the evolution of cooperation. We use our models to discuss simple aspects of the evolution of protocells, eukarya, multi-cellularity and animal societies.

AB - The evolutionary trajectory of life on earth is one of increasing size and complexity. Yet the standard equations of evolutionary dynamics describe mutation and selection among similar organisms that compete on the same level of organization. Here we begin to outline a mathematical theory that might help to explore how evolution can be constructive, how natural selection can lead from lower to higher levels of organization. We distinguish two fundamental operations, which we call 'staying together' and 'coming together'. Staying together means that individuals form larger units by not separating after reproduction, while coming together means that independent individuals form aggregates. Staying together can lead to specialization and division of labor, but the developmental program must evolve in the basic unit. Coming together can be creative by combining units with different properties. Both operations have been identified in the context of multicellularity, but they have been treated very similarly. Here we point out that staying together and coming together can be found at every level of biological construction and moreover that they face different evolutionary problems. The distinction is particularly clear in the context of cooperation and defection. For staying together the stability of cooperation takes the form of a developmental error threshold, while coming together leads to evolutionary games and requires a mechanism for the evolution of cooperation. We use our models to discuss simple aspects of the evolution of protocells, eukarya, multi-cellularity and animal societies.

KW - Complexity

KW - Evolutionary game theory

KW - Multicellularity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84871755266&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84871755266&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.11.022

DO - 10.1016/j.jtbi.2012.11.022

M3 - Article

C2 - 23206384

SN - 0022-5193

VL - 320

SP - 10

EP - 22

JO - Journal of Theoretical Biology

JF - Journal of Theoretical Biology

ER -

Evolutionary construction by staying together and coming together

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this