4.3 Article

Computing the Extended Synthesis: Mapping the Dynamics and Conceptual Structure of the Evolvability Research Front

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jez.b.22741

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. KLI Postdoctoral Fellowship
  2. Juan de la Cierva Fellowship [FJCI-2014-22685]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Since the late 1970s, the field of evolutionary biology has undergone empirical and theoretical developments that have threaten the pillars of evolutionary theory. Some evolutionary biologists have recently argued that evolutionary biology is not experiencing a paradigm shift, but an expansion of the modern synthesis. Philosophers of biology focusing on scientific practices seem to agree with this pluralistic interpretation and have argued that evolutionary theory should rather be seen as an organized network of multiple problem agendas with diverse disciplinary contributors. In this paper, I apply a computational analysis to study the dynamics and conceptual structure of one of the main emerging problem agendas in evolutionary biology: evolvability. I have used CiteSpace, an application for visualizing and analyzing trends and patterns in scientific literature that applies cocitation analysis to identify scientific specialities. I analyze the main clusters of the evolvability cocitation network with the aim to identify the main research lines and the interdisciplinary relationships that structure this research front. I then compare these results with the existing classifications of evolvability concepts, and identify four main conceptual tensions within the definitions of evolvability. Finally, I argue that there is a lot of usefulness in the inconsistency in which the term evolvability is used in biological research. I claim that evolvability research has set up trading zones in biology that make possible interdisciplinary exchanges. (C) 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available