Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A coherent theory of neutral evolution was first proposed by Motoo Kimura in 1968 [9] and by King and Jukes independently in 1969. [10] Kimura initially focused on differences among species; King and Jukes focused on differences within species. Many molecular biologists and population geneticists also contributed to the development of the ...
The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution is an influential monograph written in 1983 by Japanese evolutionary biologist Motoo Kimura.While the neutral theory of molecular evolution existed since his article in 1968, [1] Kimura felt the need to write a monograph with up-to-date information and evidences showing the importance of his theory in evolution.
Neutral theory of molecular evolution [31] 1968 Kimura, Motoo: Yes Genetic drift: Yes Yes Only at molecular level; fits in with natural selection at higher levels. Observed 'molecular clock' supports neutral drift; not a rival to natural selection, as does not cause evolution of phenotype: Darwinian evolution [32] 1859 Darwin, Charles: Yes ...
Neutral evolution can therefore be visualised as a population diffusing from one set of sequence nodes, through the neutral network, to another cluster of sequence nodes. Since the majority of evolution is thought to be neutral, [ 14 ] [ 15 ] a large proportion of gene change is the movement though expansive neutral networks.
Neutral mutation has become a part of the neutral theory of molecular evolution, proposed in the 1960s. This theory suggests that neutral mutations are responsible for a large portion of DNA sequence changes in a species. For example, bovine and human insulin, while differing in amino acid sequence are still able to perform the same function ...
Constructive neutral evolution is a competitor for both adaptationist explanations for the emergence of complex traits and hypotheses positing that a complex trait emerged as a response to a deleterious development in an organism. [2]
According to Ohta, however, the nearly neutral theory largely fell out of favor in the late 1980s, because of the mathematically simpler neutral theory for the widespread molecular systematics research that flourished after the advent of rapid DNA sequencing. As more detailed systematics studies started to compare the evolution of genome ...
According to his theory, some gene variants were neither advantageous nor harmful and were not affected by natural selection. [10] Having worked on the neutral theory of evolution with Kimura, Ohta became convinced that division into good, neutral and harmful mutations was too simplistic a model to fully explain the observed data. [10]