We marvel at the social complexity of insects, marked by anatomically and behaviorally distinguishable castes, division of labor and specialization—but how do such systems evolve? Insect societies are composed of individuals, each undergoing its own developmental process and each containing its own genetic information and experiencing its own developmental and experiential environment. Yet societies appear to function as if the colonies themselves are individuals with novel “social genes” and novel social developmental processes. We propose an alternative hypothesis. The origins of (...) complex social behavior, from which insect societies emerge, are derived from ancestral developmental programs. These programs originated in ancient solitary insects and required little evolutionary remodeling. We present evidence from behavioral assays, selective breeding, genetic mapping, functional genomics and endocrinology, and comparative anatomy and physiology. These insights explain how complex social behavior can evolve from heterochronic changes in reproductive signaling systems that govern ubiquitous and ancient relationships between behavior and ovarian development. BioEssays 29:334–343, 2007. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (shrink)

Several ant species are known with genetic effects on caste determination but, for termites, the role of environment has been assumed to be omnipotent. Now Hayashi et al. report that commitment to the nymph and worker pathways in Reticulitermes speratus follows a simple model involving two alleles at a sex‐linked locus.1 The spread of this system of genetic caste determination seems best explained by selection at the colony level. This remarkable system may be widely applicable throughout termites, although it cannot (...) be universal, and may provide a window into causal aspects of the molecular biology of caste determination. BioEssays 30:299–302, 2008. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (shrink)

The 1981 Dahlem conference was a catalyst for contemporary evolutionary developmental biology (Evo-devo). This introductory chapter rehearses some of the details of the history surrounding the original conference and its associated edited volume, explicates the philosophical problem of conceptual change that provided the rationale for a workshop devoted to evaluating the epistemic revisions and transformations that occurred in the interim, explores conceptual change with respect to the concept of evolutionary novelty, and highlights some of the themes and patterns in the (...) different contributions to the present volume, Conceptual Change in Biology: Scientific and Philosophical Perspectives on Evolution and Development. (shrink)

Evo-Devo exhibits a plurality of scientific “cultures” of practice and theory. When are the cultures acting—individually or collectively—in ways that actually move research forward, empirically, theoretically, and ethically? When do they become imperialistic, in the sense of excluding and subordinating other cultures? This chapter identifies six cultures – three /styles/ (mathematical modeling, mechanism, and history) and three /paradigms/ (adaptationism, structuralism, and cladism). The key assumptions standing behind, under, or within each of these cultures are explored. Characterizing the internal structure of (...) the cultures is necessary for understanding how they collaborate or compete, and how they are fragmented or integrated, in the rich interdisciplinary /trading zone/ (Galison 1997) of Evo-Devo. Evo-Devo is an important example of how science can progress through a radical plurality of perspectives and cultures. (shrink)