%0 Journal Article %1 weiss2000phenogenetic %A Weiss, Kenneth M. %A Fullerton, Stephanie M. %D 2000 %J Theoretical Population Biology %K developmental_systems_drift neutral_manifold review systems_drift %N 3 %P 187 - 195 %R http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/tpbi.2000.1460 %T Phenogenetic Drift and the Evolution of Genotype--Phenotype Relationships %U http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040580900914606 %V 57 %X Biologists rely on phylogeny and homology to provide continuity across phenotypic and genotypic space. For much of this century, there has been a tacit or de facto assumption that these two spaces are tightly correlated because of natural selection, so that homologous (shared- derived) phenotypes imply homologous underlying genotypes. Instances of deeply conserved genetic identity are cited to support this assumption, reflecting a prevailing view of life as a ``computable'' phenomenon in which phenotypes are regarded as the ephemeral products of a quasi-permanent determinative genetic program. However, selection acts on phenotypes, not genotypes, with no theoretically necessary connection between them. Equiv- alent genetic mechanisms may be associated with the same phenotype and over time phenogenetic drift, that is, drift in the relationship between genotypes and a given phenotype, can occur, even when a trait is conserved by strong and persistent selection. A corollary is that genetic divergence does not necessarily imply adaptive or func- tional distinction. Phenogenetic drift can make it more difficult to understand evolution at the gene level than at the trait level. With new genomic technologies, an ability to interpret comparative genotypephenotype relation- ships in terms of specific genetic variants, not just variance, will become increasingly important in biology. To meet this challenge, we must improve our under- standing of the ``tempo and mode'' of phenogenetic drift. ... The appropriate formal developments, or applications of existing theory, will have to be made by persons such as readers of TPB, who are qualified to do that (i.e., not the current authors). Those who choose to tackle this difficult issue will need to make their findings better known beyond the rarefied circle of theoretical biologists, to include those working in biomedicine or agriculture, and the general public, who pay for it.

@article{weiss2000phenogenetic, abstract = {Biologists rely on phylogeny and homology to provide continuity across phenotypic and genotypic space. For much of this century, there has been a tacit or de facto assumption that these two spaces are tightly correlated because of natural selection, so that homologous (shared- derived) phenotypes imply homologous underlying genotypes. Instances of deeply conserved genetic identity are cited to support this assumption, reflecting a prevailing view of life as a ``computable'' phenomenon in which phenotypes are regarded as the ephemeral products of a quasi-permanent determinative genetic program. However, selection acts on phenotypes, not genotypes, with no theoretically necessary connection between them. Equiv- alent genetic mechanisms may be associated with the same phenotype and over time phenogenetic drift, that is, drift in the relationship between genotypes and a given phenotype, can occur, even when a trait is conserved by strong and persistent selection. A corollary is that genetic divergence does not necessarily imply adaptive or func- tional distinction. Phenogenetic drift can make it more difficult to understand evolution at the gene level than at the trait level. With new genomic technologies, an ability to interpret comparative genotypephenotype relation- ships in terms of specific genetic variants, not just variance, will become increasingly important in biology. To meet this challenge, we must improve our under- standing of the ``tempo and mode'' of phenogenetic drift. ... The appropriate formal developments, or applications of existing theory, will have to be made by persons such as readers of TPB, who are qualified to do that (i.e., not the current authors). Those who choose to tackle this difficult issue will need to make their findings better known beyond the rarefied circle of theoretical biologists, to include those working in biomedicine or agriculture, and the general public, who pay for it.}, added-at = {2017-05-24T01:09:50.000+0200}, author = {Weiss, Kenneth M. and Fullerton, Stephanie M.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2cfa1ba06a8c3efca57ffe7af341751ae/peter.ralph}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1006/tpbi.2000.1460}, interhash = {f754ea8e343aa233567f9d68f53f6cff}, intrahash = {cfa1ba06a8c3efca57ffe7af341751ae}, issn = {0040-5809}, journal = {Theoretical Population Biology}, keywords = {developmental_systems_drift neutral_manifold review systems_drift}, number = 3, pages = {187 - 195}, timestamp = {2017-10-20T20:02:27.000+0200}, title = {Phenogenetic Drift and the Evolution of Genotype--Phenotype Relationships}, url = {http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040580900914606}, volume = 57, year = 2000 }