• HOME
  • NEWS
  • EXPLORE
    • CAREER
      • Companies
      • Jobs
    • EVENTS
    • iGEM
      • News
      • Team
    • PHOTOS
    • VIDEO
    • WIKI
  • BLOG
  • COMMUNITY
    • FACEBOOK
    • INSTAGRAM
    • TWITTER
Sunday, September 27, 2026
BIOENGINEER.ORG
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • HOME
  • NEWS
  • EXPLORE
    • CAREER
      • Companies
      • Jobs
        • Lecturer
        • PhD Studentship
        • Postdoc
        • Research Assistant
    • EVENTS
    • iGEM
      • News
      • Team
    • PHOTOS
    • VIDEO
    • WIKI
  • BLOG
  • COMMUNITY
    • FACEBOOK
    • INSTAGRAM
    • TWITTER
  • HOME
  • NEWS
  • EXPLORE
    • CAREER
      • Companies
      • Jobs
        • Lecturer
        • PhD Studentship
        • Postdoc
        • Research Assistant
    • EVENTS
    • iGEM
      • News
      • Team
    • PHOTOS
    • VIDEO
    • WIKI
  • BLOG
  • COMMUNITY
    • FACEBOOK
    • INSTAGRAM
    • TWITTER
No Result
View All Result
Bioengineer.org
No Result
View All Result
Home NEWS Science News Biology

Explaining differences in rates of evolution

Bioengineer by Bioengineer
December 18, 2018
in Biology
Reading Time: 3 mins read
0
IMAGE
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on LinkedinShare on RedditShare on Telegram

IMAGE

Credit: ETH Zurich


The rate at which evolution produces new species of plants and animals, or at which existing species die out, is a subject of much interest – and not only to scientists. That’s because the rates of speciation and extinction can tell us much about the history of our planet. If lots of new species emerge during an interval, this would indicate favourable conditions for life on earth. In contrast, extraordinary events can trigger mass extinctions, the most famous example of which was the event that wiped out the dinosaurs 66 million years ago, probably caused by a meteorite impact.

Mysterious discrepancy

It is difficult to determine the frequency with which species in the past emerged and then went extinct again. “There was no one there to witness these processes as they occurred,” says Rachel Warnock, a postdoc in the Computational Evolution research group at ETH Zurich. This is why scientists attempt to deduce the rates of speciation and extinction through indirect methods. Some information comes from fossils dated to different geological eras.

Another source of information comes from species that exist today. In particular, from what are known as phylogenetic (or evolutionary) trees of living species, which are based on DNA analysis. By applying statistical methods to these trees, scientists can determine how often new species emerged and old ones died off in the past.

However, these two approaches are problematic in that they often produce conflicting results: the speciation and extinction rates derived from the fossil record are often much higher than those calculated through phylogenetic methods. To date, it has been unclear what was responsible for this discrepancy.

Combining different approaches

But now, in collaboration with other scientists, Rachel Warnock and head of the Computational Evolution research group Tanja Stadler have found an explanation. “The two methods are based on different assumptions about how new species are formed,” Warnock says. This is why they arrive at different conclusions. But if they account for these different assumptions, then it is possible to harmonise the results.

The researchers were able to demonstrate this by looking at various groups of animals, such as whales, canines and bovines. Their success was due in part to a computer model they developed themselves: “Now we’re able to unify both perspectives,” says Warnock. The results of their work were published in the respected journal Nature Communications.

Insights into speciation

Current thinking maintains that there is not one, but rather multiple mechanisms by which new species emerge (see box). Each mechanism leads to different results; the process may produce one or two new species, while the original species either continues to exist or dies out. “When using the statistical methods to analyse phylogenies and fossils, scientists have thus far not taken these different possibilities explicitly into account,” Warnock says.

The new model now incorporates them, thus ensuring that fossil-based and phylogenetic information produce compatible speciation and extinction rates.

It also provides indications as to which speciation mechanism predominated in a particular animal or plant group. For example, the evolutionary tree and the fossil record of whales reveals that the most frequent mode may be anagenesis; that is, original species are gradually transformed into new ones (mode 3; see box). In consequence, the model could be used in future studies to gain new insights into the evolution of organisms. It also helps to harmonise the results of fossil based and phylogenetic analysis better than before.

###

Box:

Three ways in which new species can emerge:

  • Budding: A new species branches off from an existing one, which continues to exist (1 new, 0 extinct).
  • Cladogenesis: A species splits into two new species, with the ancestral form dying out (2 new, 1 extinct).
  • Anagenesis: A species develops further into a new species, with the ancestral form dying out in the process (1 new, 1 extinct).

Starting with a single species, new species may emerge in any of the three ways. In their study, ETH researchers examined whether certain species gave rise to new ones in one predominant way.

Media Contact
Tanja Stadler
[email protected]
41-613-873-410

Original Source

https://www.ethz.ch/en/news-and-events/eth-news/news/2018/12/explaining-differences-in-rates-of-evolution.html

Related Journal Article

http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07622-y

Tags: Algorithms/ModelsBiodiversityBiologyEvolutionPaleontology
Share12Tweet8Share2ShareShareShare2

Related Posts

Amino Acids Emerge as Powerful Stress Shields for Farmed Fish

Amino Acids Emerge as Powerful Stress Shields for Farmed Fish

September 27, 2026
Ancient trees are not genetic treasure chests, swamp cypress study suggests

Ancient trees are not genetic treasure chests, swamp cypress study suggests

September 26, 2026

Scientists uncover a stress-triggered molecular switch that drives depression

September 26, 2026

Blocking the Growth Hormone Receptor Extends Mouse Lifespan, Landmark Study Finds

September 26, 2026
Please login to join discussion

POPULAR NEWS

  • Near-Perfect Long Reads Reveal Hidden Mosaicism Left Behind by CRISPR Gene Editing

    29 shares
    Share 12 Tweet 7
  • Machine Learning Meets Forensic DNA: SNPs That Identify Relatives and Separate East Asian Populations

    29 shares
    Share 12 Tweet 7
  • AI-Powered Virtual Screening Uncovers Potent New Dual CDK4/6 Cancer Inhibitor

    29 shares
    Share 12 Tweet 7
  • Oral Wnt-blocking pill plus lenvatinib shows promise in endometrial cancer after immunotherapy fails

    29 shares
    Share 12 Tweet 7

About

We bring you the latest biotechnology news from best research centers and universities around the world. Check our website.

Follow us

Recent News

Near-Perfect Long Reads Reveal Hidden Mosaicism Left Behind by CRISPR Gene Editing

Machine Learning Meets Forensic DNA: SNPs That Identify Relatives and Separate East Asian Populations

AI-Powered Virtual Screening Uncovers Potent New Dual CDK4/6 Cancer Inhibitor

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 85 other subscribers
  • Contact Us

Bioengineer.org © Copyright 2023 All Rights Reserved.

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • Homepages
    • Home Page 1
    • Home Page 2
  • News
  • National
  • Business
  • Health
  • Lifestyle
  • Science

Bioengineer.org © Copyright 2023 All Rights Reserved.