The proper place of hopeful monsters in evolutionary biology

Hopeful monsters are organisms with a profound mutant phenotype that have the potential to establish a new evolutionary lineage. The Synthetic Theory of evolutionary biology has rejected the evolutionary relevance of hopeful monsters, but could not fully explain the mechanism and mode of macroevolution. On the other hand, several lines of evidence suggest that hopeful monsters played an important role during the origin of key innovations and novel body plans by saltational rather than gradual evolution. Homeotic mutants are identified as an especially promising class of hopeful monsters. Examples for animal and plant lineages that may have originated as hopeful monsters are given. Nevertheless, a brief review of the history of the concept of hopeful monsters reveals that it needs refinements and empirical tests if it is to be a useful addition to evolutionary biology. While evolutionary biology is traditionally zoocentric, hopeful monsters might be more relevant for plant than for animal evolution. Even though during recent years developmental genetics has provided detailed knowledge about how hopeful monsters can originate in the first place, we know almost nothing about their performance in natural populations and thus the ultimate difference between hopeful and hopeless. Studying the fitness of candidate hopeful monsters (suitable mutants with profound phenotype) in natural habitats thus remains a considerable challenge for the future.

[1]  G. Wagner,et al.  Evolutionary innovations overcome ancestral constraints: a re‐examination of character evolution in male sepsid flies , 2002, Evolution & development.

[2]  M. Pagel Encyclopedia of evolution , 2002 .

[3]  G. Wagner,et al.  Rupert Riedl and the re-synthesis of evolutionary and developmental biology: body plans and evolvability. , 2004, Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution.

[4]  G. Theißen,et al.  The major clades of MADS-box genes and their role in the development and evolution of flowering plants. , 2003, Molecular phylogenetics and evolution.

[5]  M. Donoghue,et al.  Transference of function, heterotopy and the evolution of plant development , 2002 .

[6]  J. Bowman,et al.  Abnormal flowers and pattern formation in floral development , 1989 .

[7]  A. I.,et al.  Neural Field Continuum Limits and the Structure–Function Partitioning of Cognitive–Emotional Brain Networks , 2023, Biology.

[8]  J. W. Valentine,et al.  Fossils, molecules and embryos: new perspectives on the Cambrian explosion. , 1999, Development.

[9]  R. Goldschmidt,et al.  The material basis of evolution , 1941 .

[10]  Julie A. Hawkins,et al.  Developmental Genetics and Plant Evolution , 2002 .

[11]  R. Rutishauser,et al.  Developmental Genetics and Morphological Evolution of Flowering Plants, Especially Bladderworts (Utricularia): Fuzzy Arberian Morphology Complements Classical Morphology , 2001 .

[12]  Günter Theißen,et al.  Birth, life and death of developmental control genes: New challenges for the homology concept , 2008, Theory in Biosciences.

[13]  P. Rudall,et al.  Roles of synorganisation, zygomorphy and heterotopy in floral evolution: the gynostemium and labellum of orchids and other lilioid monocots , 2002, Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[14]  Pilar Cubas,et al.  An epigenetic mutation responsible for natural variation in ̄ oral symmetry , 2022 .

[15]  O. Rieppel,et al.  Turtles as hopeful monsters. , 2001, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[16]  S. Carroll Homeotic genes and the evolution of arthropods and chordates , 1995, Nature.

[17]  W. Lönnig Dynamic genomes, morphological stasis and the origin of irreducible complexity , 2004 .

[18]  R. Bateman,et al.  Generating and Filtering Major Phenotypic Novelties: NeoGoldschmidtian Saltation Revisited , 2002 .

[19]  J. Kadereit,et al.  The Genetics of Evolutionary Change in Senecio vulgaris L.: A QTL Mapping Approach , 2001 .

[20]  Michael Fisher,et al.  Evolutionary synthesis of analog networks , 2005 .

[21]  B. Charlesworth,et al.  The material basis of evolution, by Richard B. Goldsmith; four reviews of the reissue of the 1940 book , 1982 .

[22]  G. Theißen Evolutionary developmental genetics of floral symmetry: the revealing power of Linnaeus' monstrous flower. , 2000, BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology.

[23]  P. Schlüter,et al.  Complex Patterns of Gene Duplication in the APETALA3 and PISTILLATA Lineages of the Ranunculaceae , 2003, International Journal of Plant Sciences.

[24]  G. Theißen,et al.  Gymnosperm Orthologues of Class B Floral Homeotic Genes and Their Impact on Understanding Flower Origin , 2004 .

[25]  M. Wills,et al.  The cambrian evolutionary ‘explosion’ recalibrated , 1997 .

[26]  F J Ayala,et al.  Tempo and mode in evolution. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[27]  Michael W. Frohlich,et al.  An evolutionary scenario for the origin of flowers , 2003, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[28]  G. Wagner What is the promise of developmental evolution? Part I: why is developmental biology necessary to explain evolutionary innovations? , 2000, The Journal of experimental zoology.

[29]  O. Gailing,et al.  The Evolutionary Reduction of Microsporangia in Microseris (Asteraceae): Transition Genotypes and Phenotypes , 2000 .

[30]  K. Weiss,et al.  The phenogenetic logic of life , 2005, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[31]  C. Darwin The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, Or, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life , 1859 .

[32]  F. Vergara-Silva,et al.  Plants and the Conceptual Articulation of Evolutionary Developmental Biology , 2003 .

[33]  H. Saedler,et al.  Heterotopic expression of class B floral homeotic genes supports a modified ABC model for tulip (Tulipa gesneriana) , 2003, Plant Molecular Biology.

[34]  Robert T. Pennock,et al.  The evolutionary origin of complex features , 2003, Nature.

[35]  Rolf Rutishauser,et al.  Evo-devo and the search for homology (“sameness”) in biological systems , 2005, Theory in biosciences.

[36]  J. Fallon,et al.  Birds have dinosaur wings: The molecular evidence. , 2005, Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution.

[37]  T. Frazzetta From Hopeful Monsters to Bolyerine Snakes? , 1970, The American Naturalist.

[38]  David G Oppenheimer,et al.  Pleiotropy, redundancy and the evolution of flowers. , 2002, Trends in plant science.

[39]  J. Levinton,et al.  SIMULATIONS OF EVOLUTIONARY RADIATIONS AND THEIR APPLICATION TO UNDERSTANDING THE PROBABILITY OF A CAMBRIAN EXPLOSION , 2004, Journal of Paleontology.

[40]  R. Sattler HOMEOSIS IN PLANTS , 1988 .

[41]  S. Gould,et al.  Ontogeny and Phylogeny , 1978 .

[42]  Editorial: Stand up for evolution , 2005 .

[43]  Jeffrey S. Levinton,et al.  Molecular Evidence for Deep Precambrian Divergences Among Metazoan Phyla , 1996, Science.

[44]  D. S. Parker,et al.  The Mostly Male Theory of Flower Evolutionary Origins: from Genes to Fossils , 2000 .

[45]  Elliot M Meyerowitz,et al.  Plants Compared to Animals: The Broadest Comparative Study of Development , 2002, Science.

[46]  E. Kellogg The Grasses: A Case Study in Macroevolution , 2000 .

[47]  G. Theißen Birth, life and death of developmental control genes: new challenges for the homology concept. , 2005 .

[48]  W. Crepet Progress in understanding angiosperm history, success, and relationships: Darwin's abominably "perplexing phenomenon". , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[49]  R. Raff,et al.  Resynthesizing evolutionary and developmental biology. , 1996, Developmental biology.

[50]  H. Iltis Homeotic Sexual Translocations and the Origin of Maize (Zea Mays, Poaceae): A New look at an old problem , 2008, Economic Botany.

[51]  J. Bowman,et al.  Abnormal flowers and pattern formation in floral , 1989 .

[52]  Jody Hey,et al.  The limits of selection during maize domestication , 1999, Nature.

[53]  E. Lewis Homeosis: the first 100 years. , 1994, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[54]  Akira Kanno,et al.  A short history of MADS-box genes in plants , 2004, Plant Molecular Biology.

[55]  Lennart Olsson,et al.  Evolutionary Developmental Biology: New challenges to the homology concept?—The 46th Phylogenetisches Symposium held in Jena , 2008, Theory in Biosciences.

[56]  R. Riedl A Systems-Analytical Approach to Macro-Evolutionary Phenomena , 1977, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[57]  Anne Chenuil,et al.  Can the Cambrian explosion be inferred through molecular phylogeny , 1994 .

[58]  L. Lukens,et al.  The origin of the naked grains of maize , 2005, Nature.

[59]  Wolf-Ernst Reif,et al.  The synthetic theory of evolution: general problems and the German contribution to the synthesis , 2000, Theory in Biosciences.

[60]  N. Eldredge,et al.  Punctuated equilibrium comes of age , 1993, Nature.

[61]  W. Gehring,et al.  The homeobox in perspective. , 1992, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[62]  Goethe and the ABC model of flower development. , 2001, Comptes rendus de l'Academie des sciences. Serie III, Sciences de la vie.

[63]  H. Iltis From Teosinte to Maize: The Catastrophic Sexual Transmutation , 1983, Science.

[64]  W. Arthur,et al.  The emerging conceptual framework of evolutionary developmental biology , 2002, Nature.

[65]  S. Carroll Chance and necessity: the evolution of morphological complexity and diversity , 2001, Nature.

[66]  J. True,et al.  PERSPECTIVE: FROM MUTANTS TO MECHANISMS? ASSESSING THE CANDIDATE GENE PARADIGM IN EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY , 2001, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[67]  L. R. Craene THE EVOLUTIONARY SIGNIFICANCE OF HOMEOSIS IN FLOWERS: A MORPHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE , 2003 .

[68]  A. Gray,et al.  I. THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES BY MEANS OF NATURAL SELECTION , 1963 .

[69]  Stephen Jay Gould,et al.  The Return of Hopeful Monsters , 2006 .

[70]  Bicalyx is a natural homeotic floral variant , 1992, Nature.

[71]  R. Goldschmidt,et al.  Richard Goldschmidt : hopeful monsters and other ‘ heresies , 2002 .

[72]  G. Theissen,et al.  Development of floral organ identity: stories from the MADS house. , 2001, Current opinion in plant biology.

[73]  E. Coen,et al.  Complementary floral homeotic phenotypes result from opposite orientations of a transposon at the plena locus of antirrhinum , 1993, Cell.

[74]  Andrew Hudson,et al.  Shape and form in plants and fungi , 1994 .

[75]  M. Akam,et al.  Hox genes, homeosis and the evolution of segment identity: no need for hopeless monsters. , 1998, The International journal of developmental biology.

[76]  T. Dobzhansky Genetics and the Origin of Species , 1937 .

[77]  Manfred Dietrich Laubichler Review of: Junker, Thomas: Die zweite Darwinsche Revolution: Geschichte des Synthetischen Darwinismus in Deutschland 1924 bis 1950. Marburg: Basilisken-Presse 2004 , 2006 .

[78]  J. Doebley,et al.  The evolution of apical dominance in maize , 1997, Nature.

[79]  G. Wagner,et al.  1,2,3 = 2,3,4: a solution to the problem of the homology of the digits in the avian hand. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[80]  H. Saedler,et al.  How the land plants learned their floral ABCs: the role of MADS-box genes in the evolutionary origin of flowers , 2002 .

[81]  Paula J Rudall,et al.  Evolutionary change in flowers and inflorescences: evidence from naturally occurring terata. , 2003, Trends in plant science.

[82]  S. Kuraku,et al.  Hox code in embryos of Chinese soft-shelled turtle Pelodiscus sinensis correlates with the evolutionary innovation in the turtle. , 2005, Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution.

[83]  R. Bateman,et al.  Saltational evolution of form in vascular plants: a neoGoldschmidtian synthesis , 1994 .

[84]  Günter Theißen,et al.  Orthology: Secret life of genes , 2002, Nature.

[85]  T. Stuessy A transitional-combinational theory for the origin of angiosperms , 2004 .

[86]  M. Svensson Homology and homocracy revisited: gene expression patterns and hypotheses of homology , 2004, Development Genes and Evolution.

[87]  Michael R. Dietrich,et al.  From Hopeful Monsters to Homeotic Effects: Richard Goldschmidt's Integration of Development, Evolution, and Genetics1 , 2000 .

[88]  E. Meyerowitz,et al.  The Arabidopsis homeotic genes APETALA3 and PISTILLATA are sufficient to provide the B class organ identity function. , 1996, Development.