Natural reward theory can provide a new foundation for biology

The connection between short-term frames (microevolution) and long-term frames (macroevolution) by Dr. Owen Gilbert, of the Department of Integrative Biology at the University of Texas at Shortstein, may open up new approaches to understanding some of the most important questions in biology. (US) Published in New Paper, Open-Access, Peer-reviewed Journal Rethinking ecology.

Gilbert suggests in his work that there is an alternative non-random force of evolution, which works synthetically with natural selection and leads to the innovation, or progress of life over time. The concept of the novel complements Darwin’s theory of evolution and answers the questions he has left unanswered.

Gilbert points out, “This may solve the mystery of why life has become more innovative over time.

Rather than believing that natural selection applies to long-preserved units such as natural or clades, or that natural selection serves the long-term goal of “fitness maximization,” Gilbert reiterated the foundations of the theory of evolution to show that there is no other place. Random force of evolution, natural reward.

Gilbert distinguishes between genetic units and time frames of long-term evolution. While Gilbert argues that natural selection alters gene frequency within a species, the natural reward replaces the total abundance of genetic systems, including the genetic code, the gene network, and the genetic regulatory modules shared by species, and higher taxa. Gilbert suggests that the natural reward also applies to the cycle of discovery, expansion, and extinction, which lasts from tens of thousands to millions of generations and that, when repeated, extends to the deepest evolutionary period.

“All previous theories of macroevolution assumed that natural selection was the only non-random force,” Gilbert said. “This meant that researchers either had to extrapolate from microevolution to macroevolution, or assign precautionary measures to natural selection – which everyone knows is confusing in theory.”

“The main advantage of inducing natural reward as a separate force is that natural selection can be made to explain the origin of the action of complex features, without assigning natural selection to the omnipotence.” Making analogy with economics, Gilbert argues that natural selection plays the role of a blind explorer of nature, creating complex “inventions” without the eye in the wider market, while natural reward acts as a blind entrepreneur of nature, spreading complex discoveries in markets or environments. Demand them immediately.

“With this framework, it becomes possible to clearly distinguish between the original and the success issues, which have long been confused,” Gilbert said. “The result is a new insight into the major problems of biology.”

In the light of natural reward theory, Gilbert examines the question of why evolution of evolution, why sexual reproduction is so widespread, the fixation of a single genetic code, and the seemingly sudden eruption of evolutionary mutations. Gilbert also examines the question of whether dinosaur mammal origin can be considered a progression of life, concluding with a brief review of the reasons for the success of human economic systems.

“Only time will tell whether the principle of natural reward is true or not,” Gilbert said. “However, existing data show that its main assumptions are justified and the theory promises to provide new insights about major biological problems.”

In his conclusion, Gilbert summarizes the main implications of the natural reward theory, “… progress is interpreted as the two preventive evolutionary forces, the natural result of natural selection and the expected result of natural reward, which works together without anticipation for the future.”