Evolution has shaped all living organisms on Earth, although many details of this process are shrouded in time. However, it is possible to see, with one's own eyes, evolution as it happens by performing experiments in defined laboratory conditions with microbes that have suitably fast generations. The longest‐running microbial evolution experiment was started in 1988, at which time twelve populations were founded by the same strain ofEscherichia coli. Since then, the populations have been serially propagated and have evolved for tens (...) of thousands of generations in the same environment. The populations show numerous parallel phenotypic changes, and such parallelism is a hallmark of adaptive evolution. Many genetic targets of natural selection have been identified, revealing a high level of genetic parallelism as well. Beneficial mutations affect all levels of gene regulation in the cells including individual genes and operons all the way to global regulatory networks. Of particular interest, two highly interconnected networks—governing DNA superhelicity and the stringent response—have been demonstrated to be deeply involved in the phenotypic and genetic adaptation of these experimental populations. BioEssays 29:846–860, 2007. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (shrink)

In recent years, biologists have increasingly been asking whether the ability to evolve — the evolvability — of biological systems, itself evolves, and whether this phenomenon is the result of natural selection or a by-product of other evolutionary processes. The concept of evolvability, and the increasing theoretical and empirical literature that refers to it, may constitute one of several pillars on which an extended evolutionary synthesis will take shape during the next few years, although much work remains to be done (...) on how evolvability comes about. (shrink)

What is it for history to matter? Stephen Gould argued that unpredictability is part of the answer. For example, the “fact“ that repeated replays of the history of life would end differently every time is a sign that history matters to the course of evolution. But there is a problem here: if a particular point in the past leaves open alternative possible futures, then in what sense does that point in the past matter with regard to which of the outcomes (...) occurs? We argue that unpredictability is central to the importance of history. However, it is not the unpredictability of the future, but rather the unpredictability of the past itself that is the key. History matters when a particular future depends on a particular past that was not bound to happen, but did. (shrink)

Biologists in the last 50 years have increasingly emphasized the role of historical contingency in explaining the distribution and dynamics of biological systems. However, recent work in philosophy of biology has shown that historical contingency carries various interpretations and that we are still lacking a general understanding of historicity, i.e., a framework from which to interpret why and to what extent history matters in biological processes. Building from examples and analyses of the long-term experimental evolution (LTEE) project, this paper argues (...) that historicity possess three essential conditions: (1) multiple possible pasts, (2) multiple possible outcomes at a given instant, and (3) a relationship of causal dependence between these two sets. These criteria can be further specified in two general forms of historicity: dependence on initial conditions and path dependence. More attention is devoted to developing a rigorous account of the latter, which captures the type of historicity displayed by stochastic processes. This paper also highlights that it is often more productive to adopt an instant-relative approach and think in terms of degree of historicity instead of trying to maintain a rigid and absolute dichotomy between historical and ahistorical (completely convergent) processes. (shrink)