Contingency and determinism in evolution: Replaying life’s tape
Open accessAbstract
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
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
A variety of evolutionary trajectories can lead to the same phenotype.
“As seen in experimental and natural evolution, a variety of evolutionary trajectories can lead to the same phenotype11–14.”
From Exploiting convergent phenotypes to derive a pan-cancer cisplatin response gene expression signature (2023) · cites this paper as [14]
Cites
Fong, S. S., Joyce, A. R., & Palsson, B. Ø. (2005) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.3832305 · Cited by 265 · see citing works
Adaptation of<i>Saccharomyces cerevisiae</i>to saline stress through laboratory evolution
DHAR, R., SÄGESSER, R., WEIKERT, C., YUAN, J., & WAGNER, A. (2011) · Journal of Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02249.x · Cited by 165 · see citing works
Cooper, T. F., & Lenski, R. E. (2010) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-10-11 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Self-citationQuandt, E. M., Deatherage, D. E., Ellington, A. D., Georgiou, G., & Barrick, J. E. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1314561111 · Cited by 78 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Fundamental constraints to the logic of living systems
Solé, R., Kempes, C. P., Corominas-Murtra, B., De Domenico, M., Kolchinsky, A., Lachmann, M., Libby, E., Saavedra, S., Smith, E., & Wolpert, D. (2024) · Interface Focus · doi:10.1098/rsfs.2024.0010 · Cited by 34 · see citing works
Highly replicated evolution of parapatric ecotypes
James, M. E., Arenas-Castro, H., Groh, J. S., Allen, S. L., Engelstädter, J., & Ortiz-Barrientos, D. (2021) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msab207 · Cited by 30 · see citing works
Exploiting convergent phenotypes to derive a pan-cancer cisplatin response gene expression signature
Scarborough, J. A., Eschrich, S. A., Torres-Roca, J., Dhawan, A., & Scott, J. G. (2023) · npj Precision Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41698-023-00375-y · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“As seen in experimental and natural evolution, a variety of evolutionary trajectories can lead to the same phenotype 11 – 14 .”
- 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
- hybrid
- doi.org
- 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