Coevolution: definition, mechanisms, and community interactions

Co-Evolution

The objective of this work is to research and examine co-evolution, what it is, how it works and the biological principle of this theory and the basis of this theory to include three different community interactions.

According to the work of Jones (2000) entitled: "Reductionism: Analysis and the Fullness of Reality" the work of Richard Dawkins makes the claim that human beings or our genetics are "survival machines - robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes. We are throwaway survival machines' create by selfish genes to propagate themselves. In short, genes are the only real forces. As the saying goes, organisms are nothing by DNA's way of making more DNA. There are no causal realities above the level of genes - no real societies, not even ultimately real individuals, but only genes pulling the strings indirectly like a computer programmer." (Jones, 2000) Others, specifically Edward Wilson hold that while human being do have "a hard biological structure unaffectable by sociocultural factors..." that once having reached "the human level, genes have given away most of their sovereignty over behavior, although they do maintain a certain amount of influence at least the behavioral qualities. In short, the genes do keep a leash on human behavior, but it is a long leash." (Jones, 2000) Those who oppose Wilson are stated to feel that "sociobiology is simplistic and mechanistic and that there is no scientific evidence for any role of genes in directing human behavior..." denying any form of genetic determinism." (Jones, 2000) Jones reports the work of Wilson and his colleague, Charles Lumsden, who are in the midst of the development of a theory of "gene and culture co-evolution: culture is created and shaped by biological processes, while the biological processes are simultaneously altered in the response to cultural change. In short, culture affects genetic evolution and genes affect cultural evolution." (Jones, 2000)

I. ORGANISM and MICROBIOTA IMPACT on HUMAN BEINGS

The process of evolution is not always a nature process and this is emphasized in the work of Wheelis, et al. (1998) entitled: "Manual for Assessing Ecological and Human Health Effects of Genetically Engineer Organisms," a publication of the Scientists' Working Group on Biosafety which states: "Genetic engineering techniques currently are used for such diverse purposes as improvement of agricultural crops and crop yield, enhancement of farmed fish and shell fish broodstocks and their associated yields, production of microbes for bioremediation and other specific tasks, and changes in disease-transmission rates by insect vectors. Each of these purposes holds the promise of benefit to one or several groups. However, the potential benefits are accompanied by potential hazards to human health and the environment." (Wheelis, et al., 1998) This hazard may arise from the effects of generation of new species at a rapid rate that involves evolution that does not occur in unison with the world and environment and its living creatures but instead is an evolution independent of other living plants, species, and life. One such negative impact is noted by Wheelis et al. To be "the potential for increased weediness among herbicide-tolerant crops." (1998) Stated as well is that interbreeding might result in the formation of hybrids resulting in genetic contamination of crops that are economically of importance and even lead to "extinction of native species or other species of local importance." (Wheelis, et al., 1998) Coe-evolution of human beings and microbiota is reviewed in the work of Dethlefsen, McFall-Ngai and Relman entitled: "An Ecological and Evolutionary Perspective on Human-Microbe Mutualism and Disease" who state that the basic concepts are experiencing a rapid change in respect to the human microbiota as these were "first shown to cause disease in human in the 1800s however, eventually it was understood that the majority of the interaction between microbiota and humans in fact do not cause disease and that in fact, some of the microbiota are beneficial to human beings. It is related in this work: "Humans and their collective microbiota are segmented into many local communities, each comprising an individual human with his or her symbionts. This ecological pattern, characterized by strong interactions within distinct local communities and limited interactions or migration between them, is described as a metacommunity." (Dethlefsen, McFall-Ngai and Relman, 2007) a second level of metacommunity organization is in existence because "individual humans belong to social groups that tend to share a similar microbiota." (Dethlefsen, McFall-Ngai and Relman, 2007) at each of these levels the structure of the metacommunity "allows selection to occur between the local units (or between individuals and social groups), which promotes mutualism...such selection occurs when a local symbiotic community succeeds or fails together, with more successful communities increasing in abundance or prevalence relative to less successful communities." (Dethlefsen, McFall-Ngai and Relman, 2007)

II. COMMUNITY-BASED CO-EVOLUTION FACTORS