Cited by 590Evolution and Genetic DynamicsEvolution and Paleontology StudiesPhilosophy and History of Science

Contingency and determinism in evolution: Replaying life’s tape

Open access
Blount, Zachary D., Lenski, Richard E., Losos, Jonathan B.·2018·Science

Abstract

Historical processes display some degree of "contingency," meaning their outcomes are sensitive to seemingly inconsequential events that can fundamentally change the future. Contingency is what makes historical outcomes unpredictable. Unlike many other natural phenomena, evolution is a historical process. Evolutionary change is often driven by the deterministic force of natural selection, but natural selection works upon variation that arises unpredictably through time by random mutation, and even beneficial mutations can be lost by chance through genetic drift. Moreover, evolution has taken place within a planetary environment with a particular history of its own. This tension between determinism and contingency makes evolutionary biology a kind of hybrid between science and history. While philosophers of science examine the nuances of contingency, biologists have performed many empirical studies of evolutionary repeatability and contingency. Here, we review the experimental and comparative evidence from these studies. Replicate populations in evolutionary "replay" experiments often show parallel changes, especially in overall performance, although idiosyncratic outcomes show that the particulars of a lineage's history can affect which of several evolutionary paths is taken. Comparative biologists have found many notable examples of convergent adaptation to similar conditions, but quantification of how frequently such convergence occurs is difficult. On balance, the evidence indicates that evolution tends to be surprisingly repeatable among closely related lineages, but disparate outcomes become more likely as the footprint of history grows deeper. Ongoing research on the structure of adaptive landscapes is providing additional insight into the interplay of fate and chance in the evolutionary process.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.aam5979

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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
Blount, Z. D., Lenski, R. E., & Losos, J. B.
Affiliations
  • Kenyon College (US)
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
Blount, Zachary D.
Venue
Science
Published
2018-11-09
Volume
362
Issue
6415
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2900065583
Cited by
590
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 65 · 2025: 79 · 2024: 85 · 2023: 90 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 89 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 4
FWCI
7.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-sa
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (DEB-1451740)
  • Harvard University
  • Michigan State University
  • BEACON Center for the Study of Evolution in Action
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Evolution and Paleontology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
Keywords
evolutionary contingency, parallel evolution, convergent evolution, natural selection, genetic drift, random mutation, fitness landscape, evolutionary history
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Biological, Animals, Biological Evolution, Humans, Laboratories, Selection, Genetic

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