Mother knows best: Epigenetic inheritance,maternal effects,and the evolution of human intelligence

Contemporary evolution biology has recognized the role of development in evolution. Evolutionarily oriented psychologists have similarly recognized the role that behavioral plasticity, particularly early in development, may have had on the evolution of species, harking back to the ideas of Baldwin (the Baldwin effect). Epigenetic theories of development provide a framework for interpreting the interacting roles of experience and genetics both in ontogeny and phylogeny and the transmission of nongenetic characteristics across generations (epigenetic inheritance). In mammals in particular, differences in maternal behavior may contribute substantially to epigenetic inheritance. Changes in early rearing experiences may have been especially important for humans’ ancestors, leading to the acquisition of symbolic functioning. Such representational changes were most influential in social cognition and led to new selective pressures furthering the evolution of symbolic abilities. Research with great apes is presented to suggest that our last common ancestor with chimpanzees likely had the behavioral plasticity and sociocognitive precursors to modify their behavior and cognition via maternal effects toward a more human-like social intelligence.     

Evolutionary psychology from a developmental systems perspective: comment on Lickliter and Honeycutt (2003)

Although agreeing with R. Lickliter and H. Honeycutt (2003) that evolutionary psychology lacks and should adopt a coherent developmental model to explain how evolved mechanisms become expressed in phenotypes, it is argued that adhering to the principles of developmental systems theory, despite enhancing evolutionary psychology, would not change appreciably its basic focus. The concepts of innateness and modularity, what is inherited and what evolves, as well as the possible role of developmental plasticity in the evolution of human cognition are discussed. It is proposed that evolutionary psychology can incorporate the developmental systems perspective into its theorizing, with the end result being a science that more closely reflects human nature.     

THEISTIC EVOLUTION IN THE POSTGENOMIC ERA

How to reconcile the theory of evolution with existing religious beliefs has occupied minds since Darwin's time. The majority of the discourse on the subject is still focused on the Darwinian version of evolutionary theory, or at best, the mid‐twentieth century version of the Modern Synthesis. However, evolutionary thought has moved forward since then with the insights provided by the advent of comparative genomics in recent decades having a particularly significant impact. A theology that successfully incorporates evolutionary biology needs to take such developments into account, because range of truly viable options among the many versions of theistic evolution that have been proposed in the past may narrow down when this is done. Here I present these previously underappreciated strains of contemporary evolutionary thought and discuss their potential theological impact.     

Précis of Evolution in Four Dimensions

In his theory of evolution, Darwin recognized that the conditions of life play a role in the generation of hereditary variations, as well as in their selection. However, as evolutionary theory was developed further, heredity became identified with genetics, and variation was seen in terms of combinations of randomly generated gene mutations. We argue that this view is now changing, because it is clear that a notion of hereditary variation that is based solely on randomly varying genes that are unaffected by developmental conditions is an inadequate basis for evolutionary theories. Such a view not only fails to provide satisfying explanations of many evolutionary phenomena, it also makes assumptions that are not consistent with the data that are emerging from disciplines ranging from molecular biology to cultural studies. These data show that the genome is far more responsive to the environment than previously thought, and that not all transmissible variation is underlain by genetic differences. In Evolution in Four Dimensions (2005) we identify four types of inheritance (genetic, epigenetic, behavioral, and symbol-based), each of which can provide variations on which natural selection will act. Some of these variations arise in response to developmental conditions, so there are Lamarckian aspects to evolution. We argue that a better insight into evolutionary processes will result from recognizing that transmitted variations that are not based on DNA differences have played a role. This is particularly true for understanding the evolution of human behavior, where all four dimensions of heredity have been important.     

Individuals and populations: How biology's theory and data have interfered with the integration of development and evolution

Research programs in quantitative behavior genetics and evolutionary psychology have contributed to the widespread belief that some psychological characteristics can be “inherited” via genetic mechanisms. In fact, molecular and developmental biologists have concluded that while genetic factors contribute to the development of all of our traits, non-genetic factors always do too, and in ways that make them no less important than genetic factors. This insight demands a reworking of the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis, a theory that defined evolution as a process involving changes in the frequencies of genes in populations, and that envisioned no role for experiential factors now known to play essential roles in adaptive trait development. Furthermore, since evolution has been taken to be strictly a population-level phenomenon while development affects individuals, the two have been understood to require different levels of analysis; this understanding has given rise to incompatible research programs. This state of affairs is untenable because development and evolution mutually influence one another in fundamental ways, several of which are detailed in this article. The balance of this paper considers the conceptual problem that has arisen because understandings generated by developmental scientists cannot be enhanced by studies designed merely to account for variation across populations. Because the theoretical conceptions and methodological tools used to study development and evolution have produced non-corresponding sets of information about these closely related and mutually influential biological processes, these conceptions and tools are interfering with the establishment of a unified theory of biology that encompasses both phenomena.     

Molecular Lamarckism: On the Evolution of Human Intelligence

In modern times, Lamarck's view of evolution, based on inheritance of acquired traits has been superseded by neo-Darwinism, based on random DNA mutations. This article begins with a series of observations suggesting that Lamarckian inheritance is in fact operative throughout Nature. I then launch into a discussion of human intelligence that is the most important feature of human evolution that cannot be easily explained by mutational selection. Thus, we are smarter than demanded by our evolutionary experience as hunter-gatherers. The difficulty lies in the inability of neo-Darwinism to satisfactorily answer the following question: How can a large energy-costly set of genes, each member of which has little apparent benefit when first created individually, all gather into a permanent existence within a short time period in each and every member of a small population (that was dispersed and geographically isolated over a huge planet) who had a low reproductive output, a low rate of beneficial mutations, and a low level of genetic contact? The article concludes with a speculative but far-reaching epigenetic theory of intelligence that does not require DNA mutation as the exclusive source of evolutionary change. Instead, cranial feedback relating brain chemistry, as affected by brain activity including education, with the genome. When it comes to the fast rate of evolution, and the dissemination of the intelligence trait worldwide, cranial feedback could make all the difference.     

Is there conscious choice in directed mutation, phenocopies, and related phenomena? An answer based on quantum measurement theory

In a previous article (Goswami, 1997), it was suggested that an application of quantum measurement theory under the auspices of a monistic idealist ontology (that consciousness is the ground of being) can solve many difficult problems of neo-Darwinism, e.g., alternating rapid creativity and homeostasis observed in evolution and the directionality, origin, and nature of life. In this article, we propose an epigenetic quantum mechanism to explain the connection of developmental processes and evolution, as has been evidenced in such controversial phenomena as directed mutation and phenocopies. *** DIRECT SUPPORT *** A31BB026 00003     

文化演化的认知视角——从个体社会学习出发探究文化动态性

文化演化是多学科共同关心的文化研究主题。文化演化的认知视角是心理学家切入该研究主题的一种方式, 它着眼于社会文化环境中的个体认知, 研究个体在社会学习过程中对文化信息的加工、改变、记忆与提取。文化演化的认知视角借用达尔文生物演化理论, 涉及文化传承、创新、选择三个子领域, 提出了文化演化的三原则: 遗传、变异、选择。文化传承的路径包括模仿和教导, 类型分为工具性与习俗性文化传承; 文化创新具有层次性, 人类特有的累积性文化演化建立在文化创新的基础之上, 体现了文化创新的代际传递; 基于行为生态学和人类认知机制的文化选择造成了文化信息的差异化适应。未来研究可以从研究概念、研究思路、研究方法三方面推进认知视角下的文化演化研究, 探索更高层次的文化创新, 扩展文化演化的前因变量, 结合新技术加深对文化演化的理解; 发挥文化演化对文化心理学研究的助推作用, 研究文化混搭、个性心理特征对文化演化的影响。     

Match fitness: development, evolution, and behavior: comment on Frankenhuis and Del Giudice (2012)

The application of evolutionary thinking to human physical and psychological medicine suggests several pathways through which evolutionary processes affect risk of disease. Among these is the concept of mismatch between an individual and its environment, either because the environment has changed for the whole species (evolutionary novelty) or because the environment has changed for an individual during its lifetime (developmental mismatch). Here we set a discussion of maladaptation and mismatch as a cause of psychopathology (Frankenhuis & Del Giudice, 2012) in the broader framework of developmental plasticity and life history trade-offs.     

A mathematical model of the evolution of individual differences in developmental plasticity arising through parental bet‐hedging

Children vary in the extent to which their development is shaped by particular experiences (e.g. maltreatment, social support). This variation raises a question: Is there no single level of plasticity that maximizes biological fitness? One influential hypothesis states that when different levels of plasticity are optimal in different environmental states and the environment fluctuates unpredictably, natural selection may favor parents producing offspring with varying levels of plasticity. The current article presents a mathematical model assessing the logic of this hypothesis – specifically, it examines what conditions are required for natural selection to favor parents to bet‐hedge by varying their offspring's plasticity. Consistent with existing theory from biology, results show that between‐individual variation in plasticity cannot evolve when the environment only varies across space. If, however, the environment varies across time, selection can favor differential plasticity, provided fitness effects are large (i.e. variation in individuals’ plasticity is correlated with substantial variation in fitness). Our model also generates a novel restriction: Differential plasticity only evolves when the cost of being mismatched to the environment exceeds the benefits of being well matched. Based on mechanistic considerations, we argue that bet‐hedging by varying offspring plasticity, if it were to evolve, would be more likely instantiated via epigenetic mechanisms (e.g. pre‐ or postnatal developmental programming) than genetic ones (e.g. mating with genetically diverse partners). Our model suggests novel avenues for testing the bet‐hedging hypothesis of differential plasticity, including empirical predictions and relevant measures. We also discuss several ways in which future work might extend our model.     

The growth of developmental thought: Implications for a new evolutionary psychology

Evolution has come to be increasingly discussed in terms of changes in developmental processes rather than simply in terms of changes in gene frequencies. This shift is based in large part on the recognition that since all phenotypic traits arise during ontogeny as products of individual development, a primary basis for evolutionary change must be variations in the patterns and processes of development. Further, the products of development are epigenetic, not just genetic, and this is the case even when considering the evolutionary process. These insights have led investigators to reconsider the established notion of genes as the primary cause of development, opening the door to research programs focused on identifying how genetic and non-genetic factors coact to guide and constrain the process of development and its outcomes. I explore this growth of developmental thought and its implications for the achievement of a unified theory of heredity, development, and evolution and consider its implications for the realization of a new, developmentally based evolutionary psychology.     

Mechanisms by which parasites influence cultures, and why they matter

At least four conceptually distinct mechanisms may mediate relations between parasite-stress and cultural outcomes: genetic evolution, developmental plasticity, neurocognitive flexibility, and cultural transmission. These mechanisms may operate independently or in conjunction with one another. Rigorous research on specific mediating mechanisms is required to more completely articulate implications of parasite stress on human psychology and human culture.     

Hierarchies,Networks, and Causality: The Applied Evolutionary Epistemological Approach

Applied Evolutionary Epistemology is a scientific-philosophical theory that defines evolution as the set of phenomena whereby units evolve at levels of ontological hierarchies by mechanisms and processes. This theory also provides a methodology to study evolution, namely, studying evolution involves identifying the units that evolve, the levels at which they evolve, and the mechanisms and processes whereby they evolve. Identifying units and levels of evolution in turn requires the development of ontological hierarchy theories, and examining mechanisms and processes necessitates theorizing about causality. Together, hierarchy and causality theories explain how biorealities form and diversify with time. This paper analyzes how Applied EE redefines both hierarchy and causality theories in the light of the recent explosion of network approaches to causal reasoning associated with studies on reticulate and macroevolution. Causality theories have often been framed from within a rigid, ladder-like hierarchy theory where the rungs of the ladder represent the different levels, and the elements on the rungs represent the evolving units. Causality then is either defined reductionistically as an upward movement along the strands of a singular hierarchy, or holistically as a downward movement along that same hierarchy. Upward causation theories thereby analyze causal processes in time, i.e. over the course of natural history or phylogenetically, as Darwin and the founders of the Modern Synthesis intended. Downward causation theories analyze causal processes in space, ontogenetically or ecologically, as the current eco-evo-devo schools are evidencing. This work demonstrates how macroevolution and reticulate evolution theories add to the complexity by examining reticulate causal processes in space–time, and the interactional hierarchies that such studies bring forth introduce a new form of causation that is here called reticulate causation. Reticulate causation occurs between units and levels belonging to different as well as to the same ontological hierarchies. This article concludes that beyond recognizing the existence of multiple units, levels, and mechanisms or processes of evolution, also the existence of multiple kinds of evolutionary causation as well as the existence of multiple evolutionary hierarchies needs to be acknowledged. This furthermore implies that evolution is a pluralistic process divisible into different kinds.

     

DNA methylation and behavioral changes induced by neonatal spinal transection

Although the importance of epigenetic mechanisms in behavioral development has been gaining attention in recent years, research has largely focused on the brain. To our knowledge, no studies to date have investigated epigenetic changes in the developing spinal cord to determine the dynamic manner in which the spinal epigenome may respond to environmental input during behavioral development. Animal studies demonstrate that spinal cord plasticity is heightened during early development, is somewhat preserved following neonatal transection, and that spinal injured animals are responsive to sensory feedback. Because epigenetic alterations have been implicated in brain plasticity and are highly responsive to experience, these alterations are promising candidates for molecular substrates of spinal plasticity as well. Thus, the current study investigated behavioral changes in the development of weight-bearing locomotion and epigenetic modifications in the spinal cord of infant rats following a neonatal low-thoracic spinal transection or sham surgery on postnatal day (P)1. Specifically, global levels of methylation and methylation status of the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (Bdnf) gene, a neurotrophin heavily involved in both CNS and behavioral plasticity, particularly in development, were examined in lumbar tissue harvested on P10 from sham and spinal-transected subjects. Behavioral results demonstrate that compared to shams, spinal-transected subjects exhibit significantly reduced partial-weight bearing hindlimb activity. Molecular data demonstrate group differences in global lumbar methylation levels as well as exon-specific group differences in Bdnf methylation. This study represents an initial step toward understanding the relationship between epigenetic mechanisms and plasticity associated with spinal cord and locomotor development.     

Children,childhood, and development in evolutionary perspective

We examine children, childhood, and development from an evolutionary perspective. We begin by reviewing major assumptions of evolutionary–developmental psychology, including the integration of “soft” developmental systems theory with ideas from mainstream evolutionary psychology. We then discuss the concept of adaptive developmental plasticity and describe the core evolutionary concept of developmental programming and some of its applications to human development, as instantiated in life history theory and the theory of differential susceptibility to environmental influence. We then discuss the concept of adaptation from an evolutionary–developmental perspective, including ontogenetic and deferred adaptations, and examine the development of some adaptations of infancy and childhood from the domains of folk psychology and folk physics. We conclude that evolutionary theory can serve as a metatheory for developmental science.     

A post-genomic view of behavioral development and adaptation to the environment

Recent advances in molecular genetics and epigenetics are reviewed that have major implications for the bio-behavioral sciences and for understanding how organisms adapt to their environments at both phylogenetic and ontogenic levels. From a post-genomics perspective, the environment is as crucial as the DNA sequence for constructing the phenotype, and as a source of information in trying to predict phenotypes. The review is organized with respect to four basic processes by which phenotypes adapt to environmental challenges, with an emphasis on the data for humans: (1) developmental plasticity, (2) epigenetic mechanisms, (3) genotype-environment correlations, and (4) gene × environment interactions.     

Development and the epigenome: the ‘synapse’ of gene–environment interplay

This paper argues that there is a revolution afoot in the developmental science of gene–environment interplay. We summarize, for an audience of developmental researchers and clinicians, how epigenetic processes – chromatin structural modifications that regulate gene expression without changing DNA sequences – may offer a strong, parsimonious account for the convergence of genetic and contextual variation in the genesis of adaptive and maladaptive development. Epigenetic processes may play a plausible explanatory role in understanding: divergent trajectories and sexual dimorphisms in brain development; statistical interactions between genes and environments; the biological embedding of early psychosocial adversities; the linkages of such adversities to disorders of mental health; the striking individual variation in the strength of those linkages; the molecular origins of critical and sensitive periods; and the transgenerational inheritance of risk and protection. Taken together, these arguments converge in a claim that epigenetic processes constitute a promising and illuminating point of connection – a ‘synapse’ – between genes and environments.     

进化发展心理学：发展中的人类本性

进化发展心理学研究社会能力与认知能力发展背后的基因与环境机制,以及基因与环境机制在特定社会文化中的表现。进化发展心理学探讨的主要问题与设计到的主要概念包括：（1）自然选择在毕生发展的早期阶段发挥作用;（2）进化发展心理学特别重视适应在婴儿期及儿童期发展中的作用;（3）儿童期的延长有助于儿童学习人类社会的复杂性;（4）发展背景的方法可以用来理解成人外显行为的进化起源;（5）基因与环境因素相互影响约束个体发展;（6）认知能力与行为活动敏感于早期环境,但二者发展也具有可塑性     

Time Past and Time Present: ;Linearities, Circularities and Life

In 1979 this journal published 'Psychodynamic and structural approaches to work with families', a paper reflecting my preoccupation at that time with the move from a psychodynamic model to a model that was not only systemic, but based on developmental principles of family life and family evolution. This paper considers some of the effects of social context, past and present, which relate to the social construction of myself as a woman therapist, and my relationship to changes in professional and gendered issues since 1979.     

Parent and Staff Uncertainties Regarding the Philosophy of Early Intervention in a Preschool Autism Program

This study investigated the influences of dominant paradigms in the field of autism on the attitudes and beliefs of stakeholders in an early intervention (EI) program for children with autism. This EI program is based on a developmental approach with the premise that intensive intervention in young children (ages 2–6 years) can change their developmental trajectory given the brain's plasticity. This study was based on 48 interviews with parents and staff, as well as three focus groups with stakeholders at a program serving young children with autism. Qualitative data analysis revealed that parents and staff were most influenced by the curative aspect of the medical model while they did not commonly demonstrate adherence to the principles of EI. Parents also revealed conflicting attitudes simultaneously, as many of them expressed wishes for their children to be cured of autism while at the same time wanting that interventions would continue indefinitely.