This whole topic of trans-generational inheritance and non-genetic factors affecting evolutionary fitness is, in my opinion, an undervalued topic in evolutionary biology today. If treating diseased cells with a particular drug elicits the over-expression of a microRNA to protect the cell, could that sustained expression be passed onto daughter cells without genetic mutation? That would be a case of some information (microRNA expression) being passed over generations of cells that influences phenotype (response to drug treatment).
It's not strictly DNA-based, but it should still have some effect on evolutionary dynamics.
I (unsuccessfully) tried to tackle some of these ideas during my PhD, looking at other modifications to the DNA fibers like DNA methylation, transcription factor binding, and the 3D coiling of DNA inside the cell, and how that influences cell populations.
There are some interesting studies in plants from a few years ago [0-1] and more recent studies using some single-cell high throughput sequencing techniques [2] to investigate what role these non-genetic perturbations might play in evolution and disease.
> But when environmental conditions become stressful, the worms become sexually attractive much sooner. For them, sex is the equivalent of a Hail Mary pass — a desperate gamble that if their offspring are more genetically diverse, some will fare better under the new, rougher conditions.
I really feel like this was written for commentary and parallels on humans. The article also starts with "organisms swiping right" to set the tone for this "worm" based research paper.
I keep waiting for someone to discover an evolutionary mechanism that looks Lamarckian. It's not that I think Darwinian evolution is wrong (I don't), but that a combination of Darwinian and Lamarckian evolution would be really cool and rather surprising.
Still, genetic regulation changes would somehow have to end up pushed into gametes in order to make it to the embryo. Or maybe there could be a placental mechanism for passing genetic regulation from the mother to the embryo. The latter would be more likely to work, so I'd bet on that if the mechanism exists at all. Either way, finding a bit of Lamarckian flavor in nature would be something else, after all these years.
Readit News
I (unsuccessfully) tried to tackle some of these ideas during my PhD, looking at other modifications to the DNA fibers like DNA methylation, transcription factor binding, and the 3D coiling of DNA inside the cell, and how that influences cell populations.
There are some interesting studies in plants from a few years ago [0-1] and more recent studies using some single-cell high throughput sequencing techniques [2] to investigate what role these non-genetic perturbations might play in evolution and disease.
[0]: https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/jo...
[1]: https://academic.oup.com/genetics/article/188/1/215/6063285
[2]: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1198-z
I really feel like this was written for commentary and parallels on humans. The article also starts with "organisms swiping right" to set the tone for this "worm" based research paper.
Here's the only relevant thing on the first page of results for "lamarckian evolution" in news: https://brainblogger.com/2018/01/08/lamarckian-evolution-is-...
Chemistry is different but mechanism is pretty universal, across the species.
A link I just found when searching news for lamarckian evolution: https://brainblogger.com/2018/01/08/lamarckian-evolution-is-...
Dead Comment
More serious: some epigentic factors do play a role.