[Fis] New Year Lecture

[Pedro C. Marijuan]

Dear  Soeren and Colleagues,

The symbiogenesis theme (Margulis' endosymbiotic theory) is one of the 
aspects to reconsider/reenter into the basically evo-info (if I may say) 
novissima synthesis. Margulis views were received in the 70's and 80's 
with tremendous hostility from the Neo-Darwinian orthodoxy. After a long 
series of turmoils it was accepted in many realms, particularly in 
popular science and textbooks industry, and even by the always reluctant 
Neo-Darwinians. Paradoxically in recent times the bioinformatic and omic 
research on the origins of eukaryotes has put into question basic tenets 
of that theory. The "deep sequencing" research on protein families has 
also be problematic for symbiogenesis. It does not mean that it is 
wrong, but that it is more complicated than previously thought... That 
is my opinion at least. In the present discussion, however, there are 
very knowledgeable parties that can give more specific arguments about that.

Talking about Neo-Darwinians, the paragraph from John Torday that I 
highlighted (see at the bottom) reminds me strongly from that other from 
Richard Dawkins' (in The Selfish Gene):


  /“We are survival machines – robot vehicles blindly programmed to
  preserve the selfish molecules known as genes. This is a truth which
  still fills me with astonishment.”/

If we compare both paragraphs, the essential difference relies on 
information. Torday's unicells develop not really multicell robots, but 
info agents that collect information  about the environment, including 
the whole elements of the niche (i.e., including in the human case from 
the "microbiome" to the "sociotype"). And fortunately the emphasis on 
"selfishness" has disappeared. Perhaps one of the consequences of 
Margulis work has been ideological, implying some general opening of 
views. Besides that, we should pay close attention to some "invisible 
threads" inside/outside those robots, like puppet strings: let me 
emphasize the enormous evolutionary importance of viruses in eukaryotic 
origins and evolution, and in epigenetic phenomena. Really masterminding 
the whole topological/architectural molecular processes.

In any event, for the purpose of the discussion, I bet that the new 
synthesis, the "novissimima", has to be evo-info... or it won't be!
(spoonful of salt, please)
All the best--Pedro


El 06/01/2018 a las 18:05, Søren Brier escribió:
>
> Dear Pedro
>
> I am wondering why no one seems to think that Lynn Margulis’ theory 
> that cell organelles such as mitochondria and chloroplasts were once 
> independent bacteria  is a crucial contribution to cell biology in 
> evolution theory ?
>
> Best wishes
>
> Søren Brier
>
> 2017 JPBMB Focused Issue on Integral Biomathics: The Necessary 
> Conjunction of Western and Eastern Thought Traditions for Exploring 
> the Nature of Mind and Life 
> <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00796107/131>  *
>
> * free promotional access to all focused issue articles until June 
> 20th 2018
>
> *From:*Fis [mailto:fis-bounces at listas.unizar.es] *On Behalf Of *PEDRO 
> CLEMENTE MARIJUAN FERNANDEZ
> *Sent:* 5. januar 2018 14:40
> *To:* JOHN TORDAY <jtorday at ucla.edu>; fis at listas.unizar.es
> *Subject:* Re: [Fis] New Year Lecture
>
> head>
>
> Dear John and FIS Colleagues,
>
> Many thanks for this opening text of the NY Lecture. Indeed 
> you have presented us an intricate panorama on one of the most obscure 
> scientific problems of our time: the central theory of biology. As you 
> say, we find with astonishment that there is literally no cell biology 
> in evolution theory. And I would ad that there is no "information 
> biology" either. A central theory becomes sort of a big Hall, where 
> plenty of disciplinary corridors converge and later criss-cross among 
> themselves. Darwinian theory is not that common hall for the really 
> big, big science domain of biology. What are or where are the elements 
> to rebuild the common Hall of the biological domain? I quote from your 
> opening text:
>
> */"It is as if the unicellular state delegates its progeny to interact 
> with the environment as agents, collecting data to inform the 
> recapitulating unicell of ecological changes that are occurring. 
> Through the acquisition and filtering of epigenetic marks via meiosis, 
> fertilization, and embryogenesis, even on into adulthood, where the 
> endocrine system dictates the length and depth of the stages of the 
> life cycle, now known to be under epigenetic control, the unicell 
> remains in effective synchrony with environmental changes."/*
>
> It is really brilliant: a heads up reversal perspective. I think out 
> of these ideas there are plenty of disciplinary excursions to make. 
> One is "informational", another "topological". Putting together two 
> different algorithmic descriptions and making them to build a torus 
> (i.e., gastrula") as a universal departure for multicellularity also 
> reminds the ideas of Stuart Pivart ("Omnia Ex Torus") about the 
> primordials of multicellularity and the role of mechanical forces in 
> the patterning of developmental processes.
>
> Echoing the ideas discussed in the Royal Society meeting (November 
> 2016), there is a pretty long list of elements to take into account 
> together with epigenetic inheritance (symbiogenesis, viruses and 
> mobile elements, multilevel selection, niche construction, genomic 
> evolution...). As I have suggested above, essential informational 
> ideas are missing too, and this absence of the informational 
> perspective in the ongoing evo discussions is not a good thing.
>
> i any case, it is such a great theme to ponder...
>
> Best wishes to all
>
> --Pedro
>
>   On Wed, 3 Jan 2018 07:15:43 -0800 JOHN TORDAY wrote:
>
> blockquote>
>
> Dear FIS Colleagues, I have attached my New Year Lecture at the 
> invitation of Professor Pedro Clemente Marijuan Fernandez. The content 
> relates a novel perspective on the mechanism of evolution from a 
> cellular-molecular vantage-point. I welcome any and all comments and 
> criticisms in the spirit of sharing ideas openly and constructively. 
> Best Wishes,
>
> John S. Torday PhD
>
> Professor
>
> Evolutionary Medicine
>
> UCLA
>
> /div>
>


-- 
-------------------------------------------------
Pedro C. Marijuán
Grupo de Bioinformación / Bioinformation Group
Instituto Aragonés de Ciencias de la Salud
Centro de Investigación Biomédica de Aragón (CIBA)
Avda. San Juan Bosco, 13, planta 0
50009 Zaragoza, Spain
Tfno. +34 976 71 3526 (& 6818)
pcmarijuan.iacs at aragon.es
http://sites.google.com/site/pedrocmarijuan/
-------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.unizar.es/pipermail/fis/attachments/20180109/75735a17/attachment.html>