Cited by 13Origins and Evolution of LifeEvolution and Genetic DynamicsPhilosophy and History of Science

Is life impossible? Information, sex, and the origin of complex organisms.

Peck, Joel R., Waxman, David·2010·Evolution

Abstract

The earliest organisms are thought to have had high mutation rates. It has been asserted that these high mutation rates would have severely limited the information content of early genomes. This has led to a well-known “paradox” because, in contemporary organisms, the mechanisms that suppress mutations are quite complex and a substantial amount of information is required to construct these mechanisms. The paradox arises because it is not clear how efficient error-suppressing mechanisms could have evolved, and thus allowed the evolution of complex organisms, at a time when mutation rates were too high to permit the maintenance of very substantial amounts of information within genomes. Here, we use concepts from the formal theory of information to calculate the amount of genomic information that can be maintained. We identify conditions under which much higher levels of genomic information can be maintained than previously considered possible among origin-of-life researchers. In particular, we find that the highest levels of information are maintained when many genotypes produce identical phenotypes, and when reproduction occasionally involves recombination between multiple parental genomes. There is a good reason to believe that these conditions are relevant for very early organisms, and thus the results presented may provide a solution to a long-standing logical problem associated with the early evolution of life.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1558-5646.2010.01074.x

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Peck, J. R., & Waxman, D.
Affiliations
University of Sussex (GB)
Corresponding author
Peck, Joel R.
Venue
Evolution
Published
2010-10-22
Volume
64
Issue
11
Pages
3300-3309
ISSN
0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2144790780
Cited by
13
References
37
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Evolution (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Origins and Evolution of Life
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
Keywords
origin of life, mutation rate, error suppression, recombination, genotype-phenotype mapping, early evolution of life, information theory, sexual reproduction
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Physiological, Alleles, Animals, Computer Simulation, Epistasis, Genetic, Female, Genetics, Population, Male, Models, Genetic, Mutation, Phenotype, Population Dynamics, Reproduction, Sex Factors, Genome, Evolution, Molecular

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review