4.2 Review

Transgressive Hybrids as Hopeful Monsters

期刊

EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
卷 40, 期 2, 页码 310-315

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11692-012-9209-0

关键词

Hopeful monster; Transgressive segregation; Hybrid speciation; Phenotypic novelty

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The origin of novelty is a critical subject for evolutionary biologists. Early geneticists speculated about the sudden appearance of new species via special macromutations, epitomized by Goldschmidt's infamous hopeful monster. Although these ideas were easily dismissed by the insights of the Modern Synthesis, a lingering fascination with the possibility of sudden, dramatic change has persisted. Recent work on hybridization and gene exchange suggests an underappreciated mechanism for the sudden appearance of evolutionary novelty that is entirely consistent with the principles of modern population genetics. Genetic recombination in hybrids can produce transgressive phenotypes, monstrous phenotypes beyond the range of parental populations. Transgressive phenotypes can be products of epistatic interactions or additive effects of multiple recombined loci. We compare several epistatic and additive models of transgressive segregation in hybrids and find that they are special cases of a general, classic quantitative genetic model. The Dobzhansky-Muller model predicts hopeless monsters, sterile and inviable transgressive phenotypes. The Bateson model predicts hopeful monsters with fitness greater than either parental population. The complementation model predicts both. Transgressive segregation after hybridization can rapidly produce novel phenotypes by recombining multiple loci simultaneously. Admixed populations will also produce many similar recombinant phenotypes at the same time, increasing the probability that recombinant hopeful monsters will establish true-breeding evolutionary lineages. Recombination is not the only (or even most common) process generating evolutionary novelty, but might be the most credible mechanism for sudden appearance of new forms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据