The First Sequenced Carnivore Genome Shows Complex Host-Endogenous Retrovirus Relationships

Host-retrovirus interactions influence the genomic landscape and have contributed substantially to mammalian genome evolution. To gain further insights, we analyzed a female boxer (Canis familiaris) genome for complexity and integration pattern of canine endogenous retroviruses (CfERV). Intriguingly, the first such in-depth analysis of a carnivore species identified 407 CfERV proviruses that represent only 0.15% of the dog genome. In comparison, the same detection criteria identified about six times more HERV proviruses in the human genome that has been estimated to contain a total of 8% retroviral DNA including solitary LTRs. These observed differences in man and dog are likely due to different mechanisms to purge, restrict and protect their genomes against retroviruses. A novel group of gammaretrovirus-like CfERV with high similarity to HERV-Fc1 was found to have potential for active retrotransposition and possibly lateral transmissions between dog and human as a result of close interactions during at least 10.000 years. The CfERV integration landscape showed a non-uniform intra- and inter-chromosomal distribution. Like in other species, different densities of ERVs were observed. Some chromosomal regions were essentially devoid of CfERVs whereas other regions had large numbers of integrations in agreement with distinct selective pressures at different loci. Most CfERVs were integrated in antisense orientation within 100 kb from annotated protein-coding genes. This integration pattern provides evidence for selection against CfERVs in sense orientation relative to chromosomal genes. In conclusion, this ERV analysis of the first carnivorous species supports the notion that different mammals interact distinctively with endogenous retroviruses and suggests that retroviral lateral transmissions between dog and human may have occurred

The Evolution of Religion: How Cognitive By-Products, Adaptive Learning Heuristics, Ritual Displays, and Group Competition Generate Deep Commitments to Prosocial Religio

Understanding religion requires explaining why supernatural beliefs, devotions, and rituals are both universal and variable across cultures, and why religion is so often associated with both large-scale cooperation and enduring group conflict. Emerging lines of research suggest that these oppositions result from the convergence of three processes. First, the interaction of certain reliably developing cognitive processes, such as our ability to infer the presence of intentional agents, favors—as an evolutionary by-product—the spread of certain kinds of counterintuitive concepts. Second, participation in rituals and devotions involving costly displays exploits various aspects of our evolved psychology to deepen people's commitment to both supernatural agents and religious communities. Third, competition among societies and organizations with different faith-based beliefs and practices has increasingly connected religion with both within-group prosociality and between-group enmity. This connection has strengthened dramatically in recent millennia, as part of the evolution of complex societies, and is important to understanding cooperation and conflict in today's world

A New Mechanistic Scenario for the Origin and Evolution of Vertebrate Cartilage

The appearance of cellular cartilage was a defining event in vertebrate evolution because it made possible the physical expansion of the vertebrate “new head”. Despite its central role in vertebrate evolution, the origin of cellular cartilage has been difficult to understand. This is largely due to a lack of informative evolutionary intermediates linking vertebrate cellular cartilage to the acellular cartilage of invertebrate chordates. The basal jawless vertebrate, lamprey, has long been considered key to understanding the evolution of vertebrate cartilage. However, histological analyses of the lamprey head skeleton suggest it is composed of modern cellular cartilage and a putatively unrelated connective tissue called mucocartilage, with no obvious transitional tissue. Here we take a molecular approach to better understand the evolutionary relationships between lamprey cellular cartilage, gnathostome cellular cartilage, and lamprey mucocartilage. We find that despite overt histological similarity, lamprey and gnathostome cellular cartilage utilize divergent gene regulatory networks (GRNs). While the gnathostome cellular cartilage GRN broadly incorporates Runx, Barx, and Alx transcription factors, lamprey cellular cartilage does not express Runx or Barx, and only deploys Alx genes in certain regions. Furthermore, we find that lamprey mucocartilage, despite its distinctive mesenchymal morphology, deploys every component of the gnathostome cartilage GRN, albeit in different domains. Based on these findings, and previous work, we propose a stepwise model for the evolution of vertebrate cellular cartilage in which the appearance of a generic neural crest-derived skeletal tissue was followed by a phase of skeletal tissue diversification in early agnathans. In the gnathostome lineage, a single type of rigid cellular cartilage became dominant, replacing other skeletal tissues and evolving via gene cooption to become the definitive cellular cartilage of modern jawed vertebrates

The nature and units of social selection

The original publication is available at www.springerlink.com Copyright SpringerOn the basis of the technical definition of selection developed by George Price (1995), we describe two forms of selection that commonly occur at the social level, subset selection and generative selection. Both forms of selection are abstract and general, and therefore also incomplete; both leave aside the question of explaining the selection criterion and why entities possess stable traits. However, an important difference between the two kinds of selection is that generative selection can accommodate an explanation of how new variation is created, while subset selection cannot. An evolutionary process involving repeated cycles of generative selection can, in principle, continue indefinitely because imperfect replication generates new variation along the way, whereas subset selection reduces variation and eventually grinds to a halt. Even if the two kinds of selection are very different, they share a number of features. First, neither subset selection nor generative selection implies improvement: neither kind of selection necessarily leads to efficiency or implies systematic outcomes. Second, both subset selection and generative selection can lead to extremely rapid effects in a social population. Third, in the social domain, both generative selection and subset selection involve choice and preference in some way: neither form of selection necessarily excludes intentionality. In concluding the article, we single out a challenge for future research in identifying the role of various units of culture in selection processes and the multiple levels at which social selection processes take place.Peer reviewe