Evolution: Convergent and Parallel Evolution

Abstract

Convergence and parallelism are two forms of independent evolution of similar or identical traits; they are often taken as evidence for adaptive evolution, but can also occur due to design limitations or by chance.

Keywords: homology; analogy; homoplasy; convergence; reversal

Figure 1.

Geometric representations of three directions that the evolution of homologous entities can follow. The x‐axis represents time and the y‐axis represents percentage divergence from the common ancestor, with 0% represented by the faint dotted lines. (a) The usual direction of evolution is divergent, with the descendant lineages becoming progressively more different from their common ancestor (indicated by the filled circle at the node) and from each other (indicated by the solid lines) over time. (b) Convergent evolution occurs when lineages first diverge and then subsequently regain similarity over time, as shown here between time 1 and 0. (c) Parallel evolution occurs when the descendant lineages neither lose nor gain similarity over time, but follow parallel evolutionary paths, as show here from time 2 through time 0. Both convergence and parallel evolution will slow the normal divergence of lineages, as indicated by the dashed lines in (a).

Figure 2.

Geometric representation of convergent evolution of unrelated protein sequences. Two completely unrelated proteins might be expected to have between about 5% and 20% sequence identity, depending on amino acid composition, as represented at time 4. If two proteins, or other biological entities, gained significant similarity over time (as indicated by the solid lines), then they would be considered to have ‘converged’ in sequence and/or function.

Figure 3.

Evolutionary mechanisms that can produce the same amino acid at a given position in the sequences of homologous proteins. (a) In the case of patristic similarities, the descendant sequences are identical due to shared common ancestry. (b) In the case of homoplastic similarities, the two descendants are identical due to independent gain of the same amino acid at the same position in the protein sequences. See text for further explanation of the different subtypes within two categories. Similar mechanistic principles apply to nucleotide sequences and organismal traits.

close

References

Doolittle RF (1994) Convergent evolution: the need to be explicit. Trends in Biochemical Sciences 19: 15–18.

Fitch WM (2000) Homology: a personal view on some of the problems. Trends in Genetics 16: 227–231.

Gould SJ (2002) The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Haas O and Simpson GG (1946) Analysis of some phylogenetic terms, with attempts at redefinition. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 90: 319–349.

Lankester ER (1870) On the use of the term homology in modern zoology, and the distinction between homogenetic and homoplastic agreements. Annals and Magazine of Natural History 6: 34–43.

Orengo CA, Flores TP, Jones DT, Taylor WR and Thornton JM (1993) Recurring structural motifs in proteins with different functions. Current Biology 3: 131–139.

de Rinaldis M, Ausiello G, Cesareni G and Helmer‐Citterich M (1998) Three‐dimensional profiles: a new tool to identify protein surface similarities. Journal of Molecular Biology 284: 1211–1221.

Sneath PHA and Sokal RR (1973) Numerical Taxonomy: The Principles and Practice of Numerical Classification. San Francisco, CA: WH Freeman.

Stewart C‐B, Schilling JW and Wilson AC (1987) Adaptive evolution in the stomach lysozymes of foregut fermenters. Nature 330: 401–404.

Weaver LH, Grütter MG, Remington SJ et al. (1985) Comparison of goose‐type, chicken‐type, and phage‐type lysozymes illustrates the changes that occur in both amino acid sequence and three‐dimensional structure during evolution. Journal of Molecular Evolution 21: 97–111.

Further Reading

Butler AB and Saidel WM (2000) Defining sameness: historical, biological, and generative homology. BioEssays 22: 846–853.

Fernald RD (2006) Casting a genetic light on the evolution of eyes. Science 313: 1914–1918.

Hildebrand M (1962) The terminology of structural and functional similarities. Systematic Zoology 11: 186–187.

Irwin DM (1996) Molecular evolution of ruminant lysozymes. EXS 75: 347–361.

Messier W and Stewart CB (1997) Episodic adaptive evolution of primate lysozymes. Nature 385: 151–154.

Patterson C (1988) Homology in classical and molecular biology. Molecular Biology and Evolution 5: 603–625.

Peacock D and Boulter D (1975) Use of amino acid sequence data in phylogeny and evaluation of methods using computer simulation. Journal of Molecular Biology 95: 513–527.

Prager EM (1996) Adaptive evolution of lysozyme: changes in amino acid sequence, regulation of expression and gene number. EXS 75: 323–345.

Sanderson MJ and Hufford L (eds) (1996) Homoplasy: The Recurrence of Similarity in Evolution. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Wake DB (1991) Homoplasy: the result of natural selection, or evidence of design limitations? American Naturalist 138: 543–567.

Wood TE, Burke JM and Rieseberg LH (2005) Parallel genotypic adaptation: when evolution repeats itself. Genetica 123: 157–170.

Zuckerkandl E and Pauling L (1965) Evolutionary divergence and convergence in proteins. In: Bryson V and Vogel HJ (eds) Evolving Genes and Proteins, pp. 97–166. New York: Academic Press.

Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

How to Cite close
Stewart, Caro‐Beth(Dec 2007) Evolution: Convergent and Parallel Evolution. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. http://www.els.net [doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0005115.pub2]