2024/03/13 by Lutz Fromhage, Michael D. Jennions, Lauri Myllymaa +1 · 1 voice · 12 citations
Agricultural and Biological Sciences · Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology · Neuroscience · Social Sciences · #Adaptation (eye) #Adaptive evolution #Animal Behavior and Reproduction #Biology #Computer science #Evolution and Genetic Dynamics #Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation #Evolutionary biology #Genetics #Measure (data warehouse) #Neuroscience
paper · pdf · doi:10.1093/evolut/qpae043
published in Evolution 78(6), 1039-1053 (Oxford University Press)
openalex publication_date 2024/03/13 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/01
A long-standing problem in evolutionary theory is to clarify in what sense (if any) natural selection cumulatively improves the design of organisms. Various concepts, such as fitness and inclusive fitness, have been proposed to resolve this problem. In addition, there have been attempts to replace the original problem with more tractable questions, such as whether a given gene or trait is favored by selection. Here, we ask what theoretical properties the concept fitness should possess to encapsulate the improvement criterion required to talk meaningfully about adaptive evolution. We argue that natural selection tends to shape phenotypes based on the causal properties of individuals and that this tendency is, therefore, best captured by a fitness concept that focuses on these properties. We highlight a fitness concept that meets this role under broad conditions but requires adjustments in our conceptual understanding of adaptive evolution. These adjustments combine elements of Dawkinsian gene selectionism and Egbert Leigh's "parliament of genes."