#65. Why There is Sex [evolution, genetics]

EV  GE

Red, theory; black, fact

The flower Coronilla varia L.

Sex as an evolvability adaptation

There are always two games in town: reproduction and evolution. Since we live on an unstable planet where the environment can change capriciously, species here have been selected for rapid evolvability per se to enable them to adapt to the occasional rapid environment changes and not go extinct. Apparently, mutations, the starting point for evolutionary adaptation, become more common when the organism is stressed, and stress may partly be a forecast of loss of fertility due to a developing genome-environment mismatch. Bacteria exhibit the large mutation of transformation under stress conditions, and three types of stress all increased the meiotic recombination rate of fruit flies (Stress-induced recombination and the mechanism of evolvability. Zhong W, Priest NK. Behavioral ecology and sociobiology. 2011;65:493-502). Recombination can involve unequal crossing-over in which changes in gene dose can occur due to gene duplication or deletion. However, since most mutations are deleterious (there are more ways to do something wrong than to do it better) many mutations will also reduce fertility, and at precisely the wrong moment: when a reduction in fertility is impending due to environment change. The answer was to split the population into two halves: the reproduction specialists and the selection specialists, and remix their respective genomes at each generation.

The roles of the two sexes

Females obviously do the heavy lifting of reproduction, and males seem to be the gene testers. So if a guy gets a bad gene, so long, and the luckier guy next to him then gets two wives. The phenomenon of greater male variability (Greater male than female variability in regional brain structure across the lifespan. Wierenga LM, Doucet GE, Dima D, Agartz I, Aghajani M, Akudjedu TN, Albajes‐Eizagirre A, Alnæs D, Alpert KI, Andreassen OA, Anticevic A. Karolinska Schizophrenia Project (KaSP) Consortium. Hum. Brain Mapp., doi:10.1002/hbm.25204, and I have never seen so many authors on a paper: 160.) suggests that mutations have more penetrance in males, as befits the male role of cannon fodder/selectees. What the male brings to the marriage bed, then, is field-tested genetic information. This system allows many mutations to be field tested with minimal loss of whole-population fertility, because it is the females who are the limiting factor in population fertility.

Chromosomal mechanisms of greater male variability

Chromosomal diploidy may be a system for sheltering females from mutations, assuming that the default process is for the phenotype that develops to be the average of the phenotypes individually specified by the paternal and maternal chromosome sets. Averaging tends to mute the extremes. The males, however, may set up a winner-take-all competition between homologous chromosomes early in development, with inactivation of one of them chosen at random. The molecular machinery for this may be similar to that of random x-inactivation in females. The result will be greater penetrance of mutations through to the phenotype and thus greater male variability. 

Quantitative prediction

This reasoning predicts that on a given trait, male variability (as standard deviation) will be 41% greater than the female variability, a testable prediction. 41% = [SQRT(2) -1] × 100. Already in my reading I have found a figure of 30%, which is suggestive. 

Mechanistic reconciliation with Mendel's laws

The postulated chromosome inactivation process may feature an exemption mechanism that operates on genes present in only one copy per parent. The effect will be to double the penetrance of dominant alleles at that gene. 

#56. Stress and Schizophrenia [neuroscience]

NE

Red, theory; black, fact

Introduction

The main positive symptoms of schizophrenia, namely hallucinations, word salad, and loosening of associations, all seem to be variations of the latter, so loosening of associations will here be taken as the primary disorder. Stress and the brain's dopaminergic system are strongly implicated in the causation of schizophrenia. In connection with stress, psychologists speak of "the affective [emotional] pathway to schizophrenia." 

Organismal responses to stress

Stress is known to increase genetic variability in bacteria, a process known as transformation. Stress is likewise known to increase the meiotic recombination rate in sexually reproducing organisms such as fruit flies. (Stress-induced recombination and the mechanism of evolvability. Zhong W, Priest NK. Behavioral ecology and sociobiology. 2011;65:493-502.) It seems that when an organism is in trouble, it begins casting about ever more widely for solutions. If evolution is the only mode of adaptation available, this casting about will take the form of an increase in the size and frequency of mutations. In conscious humans, however, this casting about in search of solutions in the face of stress may well take the form of a loosening of associations during thought. Should the person find the solution he or she needs, then presumably the stress levels go down and the thought process tightens up again, so we have a negative feedback operating that eventually renormalizes the thought process and all is well. In optimization theory, this process is called "simulated annealing."

Disorder of a cognitive stress response

But what if the person does not find the solution they need? Then, presumably the loosening of associations gets more and more pronounced ("reverse annealing") until it begins to interfere with the activities of daily living and thus begins to contribute net stress, thus making matters worse, not better. Now we have a pernicious positive feedback operating, and it rapidly worsens the state of the sufferer in what is known as a psychotic break, resulting in hospitalization. That these psychotic breaks are associated with tremendous stress is made clear by the fact that post-traumatic stress disorder is a common sequel of a psychotic episode.

 

Stress: molecular aspects

Messenger substances (i.e., hormones and neuromodulators) known to carry the stress signal are: CRF, ACTH, cortisol, noradrenaline, adrenaline, dopamine, NGF, and prolactin. The well-known phenomenon of stress sensitization, which may be part of the disease mechanism of schizophrenia, probably inheres in long-term changes in protein expression and will not be apparent in a simple blood test for any of the above substances without a prior standardized stress challenge. (e.g., the process of getting the needle itself. In that case, you would install a catheter through the needle to permit repeated blood sampling and collect the baseline sample long after the intervention sample, not before, as is customary in research.)

Other mental illnesses

Bipolar disorder may result from an analogous positive feedback affecting another problem solving adaptation of the brain, which would be modelled by the alternation of brainstorming sessions (mania) with sessions in which the brainstormed productions are soberly critiqued (depression).

Brain mechanisms

How does the loosening of associations of schizophrenia arise? I conjecture that one activated sensory memory represented in the posterior cortex does not activate another directly, but indirectly via an anatomically lengthy but fast relay through the prefrontal cortex, which has a well known dopaminergic input from the ventral tegmental area of the midbrain. A higher vertebrate may have a free-will spectrum, with machine-like performance and high dopaminergic tone at one end, and at the other, a carefully considered performance verging on overthinking, with low dopaminergic tone. Persons with schizophrenia have pushed past the latter end of the spectrum into dysfunction. Dopamine could orchestrate movement along the free-will spectrum by a dual action on the prefrontal cortex: inhibiting associational reflexes passing back to posterior cortex while facilitating direct outputs to the motor system. Dual actions of neuromodulators are a neuroscientific commonplace (e.g., my PhD thesis) and dopamine is a neuromodulator. The NMDA receptor, which is also strongly implicated in schizophrenia, enters the picture as the source of excitation of the ventral tegmental area.

Photo by Ameer Basheer on Unsplash

#44. The Denervation-supersensitivity Theory of Mental Illness [neuroscience, evolution, genetics]

NE  EV  GE    

Red, theory; black, fact

Midplane section of human brain annotated with the Brodmann areas, which are related to different functions

People contract mental illness but animals seemingly do not, or at least not outside of artificial laboratory models such as the unpredictable, mild-stress rodent model of depression. A simple theory to account for this cites the paleontological fact that the human brain has been expanding at breakneck speed over recent evolutionary time and postulates that this expansion is ongoing at the present time, and that mental illness is the price we are paying for all this brain progress.

The Evolution of the Human Brain

In other words, the mentally ill may carry the unfavorable mutations that have to be selected out during this progress. The mutation rate in certain categories of mutation affecting human brain development may be elevated in modern humans by some sort of "adaptive" hot-spot system. "Adaptive" is in scare quotes to indicate that the adaptation inheres in changes in the standard deviation of traits, not the average, and is therefore not Lamarkian.

In brain evolution, the growth changes in the various parts very probably have to be coordinated somehow. There may not be any master program doing this coordination. Rather, the human brain would comprise scores of tissue "parcels," each with its own gene to control the final size that parcel reaches in development. This is consistent with the finding of about 400 genes in humans that participate in establishing body size. All harmonious symmetry, even left-right symmetry, would have to be painstakingly created by brute-force selection, involving the early deaths of millions of asymmetrical individuals. 

Assuming that left and right sides must functionally cooperate to produce a fitness improvement, mutations affecting parcel growth must occur in linked, left-right pairs to avoid irreducible-complexity paradoxes. The crossing-over phenomenon in egg and sperm maturation may create these linked pairs of mutations, where the two mutations are identified with the two ends of the DNA segment that translocates. Since the two linked mutations are individually random, linkage per se does not eliminate asymmetry. That must be done by natural selection, as previously stated, so there is a subtlety here. Natural selection could equally well create adaptive asymmetry. The human heart and the claws of the fiddler crab are examples.

Functional Human Brain Anatomy 

Most of the evolutionary expansion of the human brain appears to be focused on association cortex, which would implement if-then rules like those making up the knowledge bases familiar from the field of artificial intelligence. The "if" part of the rule would be evaluated in post-Rolandic cortex, i.e., in temporal and parietal association cortices, and the "then" part of the rule would be created by the pre-Rolandic association cortex, i.e., the prefrontal cortex. The white matter tracts running forward in the brain would connect the "if" part with the "then" part, and the backward running white-matter tracts would carry priming signals to get other rules ready to "fire" if they are commonly used after the rule in question.

Possible Disorders of Brain Growth

Due to such tight coordination, the ideal brain will have a fixed ratio of prefrontal cortex to post-Rolandic association cortex. However, the random nature of the growth-gene bi-mutations, perhaps at mutational hot-spots, permitting human brain evolution will routinely violate this ideal ratio, leading to the creation of individuals having either too much prefrontal cortex or too much temporal/parietal cortex. In the former case, prefrontal cortex will be starved of sensory input. In the latter case, sensory association cortex will be starved of priming signals feeding back from motoric areas.

Denervation supersensitivity occurs when the normal nerve supply to a muscle is interrupted, resulting in a rapid overexpression of acetylcholine receptors on the muscle. This is an adaptation to compensate for weak nerve transmission with a re-amplification of the signal by the muscle. Analogous effects have been found in areas of the cerebral cortex deprived of their normal supply of sensory signals, so the effect seems to be general.

In cases of genetically-determined frontal-parietal/temporal imbalance, the input-starved side would develop denervation supersensitivity, making it prone to autonomous, noise-driven nervous activity.

Differential Growth-Related Brain Disorders 

If the growth excess is in sensory association cortex, this autonomous activity will manifest as hallucinations, resulting in schizophrenia. If the growth excess is in the prefrontal cortex, however, the result of the autonomous activity will be mania or a phobia.

The non-overgrown association cortex might secondarily develop the opposite of denervation supersensitivity as the result of continual bombardment with autonomous activity from the other side of the Rolandic fissure. This could account for the common observation of hypoprefrontality in cases of schizophrenia.

Picture credit: Wiki Commons

#38. Can Irreducible Complexity Evolve? [genetics, evolution]

EV   GE

Red, theory; black, fact

2 x 2

The Key Insight

Sexual reproduction may allow the evolution of irreducible complexity by increasing the intrinsic complexity of the basic building block of change, the mutation.

Irreducible Complexity 

Influential biologist Richard Dawkins wrote in "The God Delusion" that a genuine case of irreducible complexity will never be found in biology. A case of irreducible complexity would be some adaptation that would require an intelligent designer because it could never evolve one mutation at a time, and Dawkins believes there is no such intelligent designer in biology.

In classic natural selection, each mutation must be individually beneficial to its possessor in order for selection to increase its prevalence in the population to the point where the next incremental, one-mutation improvement becomes statistically possible. In this way, all manner of wondrous things are supposed to evolve bit by tiny bit. You have irreducible complexity if an advantageous evolutionary innovation requires two mutations,  but neither confers any advantage in isolation and so cannot be selected up to a sufficiently high frequency that the second mutation is likely to happen in the background of the first.

However, I am seeing irreducible complexity everywhere these days. 

Possible Cases of Irreducible Complexity

For example, your upper-jaw dentition must mesh accurately with that of your lower jaw or you can't eat. Thus, the process of evolutionary foreshortening of the muzzle of the great apes to the flat human face could never have happened, assuming that a single mutation affects only the upper or lower jaw. 

Furthermore, how can any biological signaling system evolve one mutation at a time? At a minimum, you always need both the transmitter adaptation and the receiver adaptation, not to mention further mutations to connect the receiver circuit to something useful.

The evolution of altruism presents a similar problem. The lonely first altruist in the population is always at a disadvantage in competition with the more selfish non-mutants unless it also has a signaling system that lets it recognize fellow altruists (initially, close relatives) and a further mutation that places the altruistic behavior under the control of the receiver part of this system. Thus, altruists would only be altruistic to their own kind, the requirement for altruism to be selected in the presence of selfishness. Finally, the various parts of this system must be indissolubly linked in a way that the non-altruists cannot fake.

A Solution   

Consider the crossing-over events that occur during meiosis as complex mutations: two changes to the genome from a single event, each corresponding to one end of the DNA segment that translocates. In crossing over, two homologous chromosomes pair up along their length and swap a long segment of DNA, a process requiring two double-chain breaks on each end, and their corresponding repairs. A very far-reaching change to the genetic information can occur during crossing-over that is termed unequal crossing-over. This form of the process arises because of inaccuracies, sometimes major, in the initial alignment of the homologous chromosomes prior to crossing-over. When the process is finished, one chromosome has been shortened and the other has been lengthened. This is the major source of gene duplication, which, in turn, is a major source of junk DNA, the part that is classified as broken genes.

A Mechanism for the Evolution of Complexity 

Anatomical features such as jaw length and axon targets may be controlled by variations in gene dose that originate in unequal crossing-over.

In this way, a concerted change affecting multiple distinct sites becomes possible. The two ends of the recombinant segment can in principle be functionally unrelated initially. They become related if both are affected by the same complex mutation and the entire change increases fitness and is thus selected.

A single complex mutation could in principle produce a communication channel at one stroke because of the number of simultaneous changes involved. 

Statistical Issues

The probability of a combination of simultaneous local changes being beneficial to the organism is much smaller on mathematical grounds than is the probability of a given single-nucleotide change being beneficial. However, these unfavourable statistics are at least partly offset by the existence of a dedicated system for producing complex mutations in large numbers, namely meiosis, part of the process of maturation of egg and sperm cells.

The Big Picture 

Complex mutations provide a way for a species to discontinuously jump into new niches as they open up, possibly explaining how a capacity for this kind of mutation could spread and become characteristic of surviving species over time. This idea also provides another explanation for the lack of transitional forms in the fossil record.

#6. Mental Illness as Communication [neuroscience, genetics]

NE   GE

Red, theory; black, fact

The effects of most deleterious mutations are compensated by negative feedback processes occurring during development in utero. However, if the population is undergoing intense Darwinian selection, many of these mutations become unmasked and therefore contribute variation for selection. (Jablonka and Lamb, 2005, The MIT Press, "Evolution in Four Dimensions")

Basic Darwinism Is So Inefficient

However, since most mutations are harmful, a purely random process for producing them, with no pre-screening, is wasteful. Raw selection alone is capable of scrubbing out a mistake that gets as far as being born, at great cost in suffering, only to have, potentially, the very same random mutation happen all over again the very next day, with nothing learnt. Repeat ad infinitum. This quarrels with the engineer in me, and I like to say that evolution is an engineer. 

Evolution of Evolution 

Nowadays, evolution itself is thought to evolve. A simple example of this is the evolution of DNA repair enzymes, which were game-changers, allowing much longer genes to be transmitted to the next generation reliably, resulting in the emergence of more complex lifeforms.

What I Would Like to See

A further improvement would be a screening, or vetting process for genetic variation. Once a bad mutation happens, you mark the offending stretch of DNA epigenetically in all the close relatives of the sufferer, to suppress further mutations there for a few thousand years, until the environment has had time to change significantly.

Obviously, you also want to oppositely mark the sites of beneficial mutations, and even turn them into recombination hotspots for a few millennia, to keep the party going. Hotspots may even arise randomly and spontaneously, as true, selectable epi-mutations. 

A Problem With Mutation Hotspots on the DNA Strand

The downside of all this is that even in an adaptive hotspot, most mutations will still be harmful, leading to the possibility of "hitchhiker" genetic diseases that cannot be efficiently selected against because they are sheltered in a hotspot. Cystic fibrosis may be such a disease, and as the hitchhiker mechanism would predict, it is caused by many different mutations, not just one. It would be a syndrome defined by the overlap of a vital structural gene and a hotspot, not by a single DNA mutation. I imagine hotspots to be much more extended along the DNA than a classic point mutation.

It is tempting to suppose that the methylation islands found on DNA are these hotspots, but the scanty evidence available so far is that methylation suppresses recombination hotspots, which are generally defined non-epigenetically, by the base-pair sequence.

Mental Illness In Evolution 

The human brain has undergone rapid, recent evolutionary expansion, presumably due to intense selection, presumably unmasking many deleterious mutations affecting brain development that were formerly silent. Since the brain is the organ of behavior, we expect almost all these mutations to indirectly affect behavior for the worse. Does that explain mental illness?

Mental illnesses are not random, but cluster into definable syndromes. My reading suggests the existence of three such syndromes: schizoid, depressive, and anxious. My theory is that each is defined by a different recombinant hot spot, as in the case of cystic fibrosis, and may even correspond to the three recently-evolved association cortices of the human brain, namely parietal, prefrontal, and temporal, respectively. 

How Mental Illness Could Be Beneficial 

The drama of mental illness would derive from a communication role in warning nearby relatives that they may be harbouring a bad hotspot, causing them to find it and cool it by wholly unconscious processes. Mental illness would then be the push-back against the hotspots driving human brain evolution, keeping them in check and deleting them as soon as they are no longer pulling their weight fitness-wise. The variations in the symptoms of mental illness would encode the information necessary to find the particular hot spot afflicting a particular family.

A Possible Mechanism

Now all we need is a communication link from brain to gonads. The sperm are produced by two rounds of meiosis and one of mitosis from the stem-like, perpetually self-renewing spermatogonia, which sit just outside the blood-testes barrier and are therefore exposed to all blood-borne hormones. These cells are known to have receptors for the hypothalamic hormone orexin A, as well as many other receptors for signalling molecules that do or could plausibly originate in the brain as does orexin A. Orexin A is lipophilic and rapidly crosses the blood-brain barrier by diffusion. Some of the other receptors are:

• retinoic acid receptor α
• glial cell-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) receptor
• CB2 (cannabinoid type 2) receptor
• p75 (For nerve growth factor, NGF)
• kisspeptin receptor.

PS: for brevity, I left out mention of three sub-functions necessary to the pathway: an intracellular gonadal process transducing receptor activation into germ line-heritable epigenetic changes, a process for exaggerating the effects of bad mutations into signals for purposes of interpersonal communication, and a process of decoding the communication in the brains of the recipients.

Photo by Charlotte Noelle on Unsplash