Volume1|Issue1|Page010
PLoSBiology|http://biology.plosjournals.org PLoSBiology|http://biology.plosjournals.org Volume1|Issue1|Page011
Feature
DigitalEvolution
BillO’Neill
R
ichLenskidecidedhewas ontoagoodthingfromhis veryirstencounterwithdigital evolution.Itallbeganwhenheused thetechnologyinwhichartiicial organismsintheformofcomputer codeevolveindependentlybyself-replicating,mutating,andcompeting tore-examineanearlierstudywith bacteria.Theoriginalstudyhad contradicted‘someinluentialtheory’ suggestingthatrandommutations showasystematictendencytowards synergisticinteractions.Hisdigital results,hediscovered,matchedhis organicones.‘It’sgreatwhenthesetwopowerful experimentalsystemsagree,because itsuggestssomegeneralityaboutthe evolutionofgeneticarchitectures’, recallsLenski,professorofmicrobial ecologyatMichiganStateUniversity (MSU).‘Butevenifthedigitaland biologicalrealmssometimescomeinto scientiicconlict,itwouldonlylead onetoaskwhyandthenprobethe relevantfactorsmoredeeply’.
ComplexChallengesandtheVirtue
ofSimplicity
Hecanhardlycontainhimself.‘It’s awin--winsituation,leadingtowards increasedgenerality,ontheonehand, andfurtherexperimentstobetter understandspeciicoutcomes,onthe other’.Forhispart,Lenskihassince gonemuchfurtherwiththetechnology (Box1;Figure1)andalsosoonexpects tobeannouncingresultsthatcould broadendigitalevolution’sappealeven more.
Earlierthisyear,heandChris Adami,whoheadstheDigitalLife LaboratoryattheCaliforniaInstitute ofTechnology(Caltech),published somebreathtakingindingsfrom theield.Theircollaborationbrings togetherbiologistsandcomputer scientists,physicistsandphilosophers inanartiicialworldonaquestto understandhowevolutionworks. Thoughtheymaystillbesomeway fromreachingthatobjective,their latestadvancesuggeststhattheyareon therighttrack.
Theresearchconfrontsevolutionary theory’slong-standingchallengeto explainhowanorganismcandevelop complexfeaturessimplyasaresult ofrandommutationandnatural selection.Thechallengeremainsa controversialone,too.Supporters ofintelligentdesign,abranchofthe creationistmovement,promotethe notionof‘irreduciblecomplexity’as evidencethatDarwinianevolutionis alawedtheory.Thenotionpurports thatacomplexfeaturecannotevolve sequentiallyfromitselements,and musthavebeendesignedinonestepby somehigherintelligence.
Traditionalinvestigations,basedon molecularbiologyandpalaeontology, haveyieldedmuchevidenceaboutthe incrementalevolutionoftheeyeor thebrain,forinstance.Butcontinuing ignoranceaboutmanydevelopmental processesandtheabsenceofkeyfossil recordsmeanthataccountswithout missinglinks,toendorsethetheory, mayneverberealised.
WhichiswhattemptedLenskiand Adamitoexaminethechallengein theirvirtualworld.Thisisaworld wheretimescalescontractand,above all,whereotherconstraintsof‘wet’ biologyhavenoplace.‘It’snotjust thespeed,byanymeans’,saysLenski. ‘It’salsothepowertomanipulate almostanyvariableonecanimagine, tomeasurevariableswithabsolute precision,tostoreinformationthat thenallowsonetotracebacka complexchainofevents,andtotake evolvedorganismsandsubjectthem tonewsortsofanalysesthatonemight notevenhaveanticipatedwhenirst collectingthedata’.
Itisaplacewherevirtueismadeof simplicity.‘Theworldswe’redealing withhereareextraordinarilysimple comparedwiththerealworld’,says Adami.‘Anyofthebiochemistry associatedwithtranscriptionand translation,forexample,anythingmore complexthanrelativelyshortviraltypes ofgenomes,that’soutofourleague’, henotes.‘Wecan’tseetranscription andtranslationbecausewedon’thave transcriptionandtranslation---wego rightfromsequencetofunction’.
Buttheprinciplesofevolutionary theorymakesuchrestrictions unimportant,hesays.‘Manyofthe [theory’s]predictionsdon’tdependon theselittledetailsofmolecularbiology’, notesAdami.‘Theprinciplesarevery, verygeneral,andverysimple,andin theendtheyaremostlyresponsible fortheoveralldynamicsthatyousee inthesesimplesystems’.Lenskigoes further.Thesevirtualrealities,hesays, ‘offerusawindowintoanalternative world,andperhapsevenapartof thefutureofourown,wherethe fundamentalevolutionarymechanisms ofmutationandnaturalselectionplay outinanovelphysicalrealm’.
Lenskiisinterestedinwatching
BillO’NeillisafreelancejournalistfromLondon, UnitedKingdom.E-mail:[email protected] DOI:10.1371/journal.pbio.0000018
Volume1|Issue1|Page012
PLoSBiology|http://biology.plosjournals.org PLoSBiology|http://biology.plosjournals.org Volume1|Issue1|Page013
evolutionasithappensandhasatrack recordinthestudyofevolvingorganic systems,primarilyusingEscherichiacoli. ‘We’remakinggreatstrideselucidating theprecisegeneticbasesofthe adaptationthathasoccurredduring tensofthousandsofgenerationsin ourlong-termE.colipopulations’,he reports.‘Evenaftermorethan30,000 generationsinaconstantenvironment, we’restillseeingsomemajorphenotypic evolutionarychanges’,headds.
EvolutioninAction
Adami,whoalsoworksintheoretical physicsattheJetPropulsionLaboratory atCaltech,hasdevelopedasoftware platform,knownasAvida,forresearch onevolvingcomputerprograms, thedigitalorganismsthatheterms ‘Avidians’.Thesecondversion,Avida 2.0,becameavailableforfreepublic use(http://dllab.caltech.edu/avida/) earlierthisyear,adecadeafterwork began.
‘IcametoCaltechin1992on aspecialfellowship’,herecalls, ‘whichbasicallytoldme,“Youcando whateveryouwantandwe’renotgoing tocheckonyouforthreeyears—just sitthereandthinkofsomething’’’. Sohedid—anddiscoveredthe pioneeringworkonevolving computerprogramsbyTomRay,the computationalecologistwhoinvented theTierrasoftwaresystem.
‘Inasense,TomRay’sTierrawas aproofofconcept---heshowedthat computerprogramscanevolve,and itwasawatershedmoment.Without hiswork,minewouldn’thaveexisted’, acknowledgesAdami.‘ButIwantedthis digitallifesystemtobeanexperimental systemjustlike,let’ssay,RichLenski andE.colibacteria’.
Adamiworkedquicklywiththehelp ofundergraduatestodesignandwrite codeandsoonhadabeta-version ready:‘Sure,thesekidscanprogram’, helaughs.Buttheprogrammers werehumananderrorscreptin.The teamwouldrunthesystemovernight anddiscover‘weirdthings’thenext morning:‘Thepathofevolutionwent inastrangeway,notbecausetheworld dictatedit,butbecausesomebug dictatedit’,notesAdami.‘Youneedto knowyoursystemperfectly,atleastat thebeginning,andthatwasreallythe hardpartforthenextiveyears’.
Ontheway,however,thework attractedtheattentionofMicrosoft, thesoftwarecompany,whichwaseager toknowhowitsdesignerscouldevolve computerprogramsinsteadofwriting themandinevitablyintroducing bugs,too.Somesoftwarealready stretchestomorethan10millionlines ofcode,andMicrosoft,concerned foritssurvivalastheittest,foresaw aproblem.Itpredictedprograms expandingsomuchthat,sometime
between20and50yearsintothe future,theywouldreachwhatAdami callsthe‘complexitywall’,wherethe numberoferrorswouldmakethem unusable.
Thealternativeofevolvingprograms lookedlikeagreatideatoMicrosoft, especiallythewayAdamitellsit.‘I knowapieceofsoftwarethat’s3 billionlinesofcodethatcontrolsall ouractions’,hesays,referringtothe humangenome.‘Theremaybebugs, buttheydon’tleadtoacrash.It’svery robustprogramming,withpiecestaken fromallkindsofdifferentsources,and somehowitworks.Andthereasonwhy itworksisbecauseitwasevolvedand notwritten’.
Forayear,theCaltechteamexplored thefeaturesofprogramminglanguages thatmakeonelanguagemoreevolvable thananother,butmovedonwhen Microsoft’sinterestsswitchedtomore directlyappliedscienceandAdami wantedtocontinuetofocusonthe fundamentalprinciplesunderpinning evolution.
Avidawasreadytorunandbeginning toofferamuchmoreversatileplatform thanTierra,withadvancesthathave sincebeenhonedevenfurther.‘Wecan exchangenotonlythe[processor’s] instructionsetonthely,wecanalso changetheentirestructureoftheCPU [centralprocessingunit]onthely’, saysAdami.‘Ifyouwanttotestdifferent physicsorchemistry,thelexibilityof AvidacomparedwithTierraislikethe differencebetweendrivingamodern PorscheandaModel-TFord.They’re bothcars,but...’
Themostimportantdifference, insistsAdami,‘isthepossibility ofrewardstoprogramsifthey accomplishinterestingthings,in thiscasecomputations’.Hedrawsa parallelbetweenthewayreplicating micro-organismsexploitchemical reactionstoyieldenergyandthe wayevolvingAvidiansperform computationstosecureextraCPU time.‘It’saone-to-oneanalogy’,notes Adami,‘andthefactthatitworks sowellmaytellyousomethingvery, veryfundamentalabouttheduality betweencomputationalchemistriesand biochemicalchemistries’.
InAdami’scollaborationwithLenski toshowhowcomplexfeaturescan evolvesequentially,theAvidiangenome isacircularsequenceofinstructions incomputercode.Atthestartofits
DOI:10.1371/journal.pbio.0000018.g001
Volume1|Issue1|Page012
PLoSBiology|http://biology.plosjournals.org PLoSBiology|http://biology.plosjournals.org Volume1|Issue1|Page013
computationalexistence,anAvidian canonlyreplicate.Ifitevolveslogic functionsintheprocess,however,the systemrewardsitwithenergy,inthe formoftimeontheCPU.Thisreward enablestheevolvingAvidiantoexecute instructionsthatinturnhelpitto maturetosecuremorerewards,andso on,tosafeguarditsfuture.
Theresultsthrilledthe
experimenters.TeamsatCaltechand MSUwereabletotracethegenealogy ofAvidians,withoutanymissinglinks, fromsimpleself-replicatorthrough unexpectedtransitionalformto complexperformerofmanylogic functions,withrandommutationand naturalselectionaloneresponsiblefor theevolution.
‘Manybiologistsaredelightedto seesuchacleardemonstrationofthe evolutionfromscratchofdemonstrably
complexfeatures’,saysLenski,‘and inawaythataccordssowellwiththe hypothesisirstvoicedbyDarwinand nowadayssupportedbyalargebody ofcomparativedatathatcomplexnew featuresarisebyco-optingexisting structuresthatpreviouslyservedother functions’.Healsonotesmuchinterest inthewaythatdamagingmutations sometimesprovedtobeessential steppingstonesintheevolutionofnew functions.
Toopponentsofevolutionarytheory, Lenskiiseagertoemphasisethatthe study‘doesnotaddresstheoriginof life,norwhethertheuniverseitself wasdesignedtoallowtheevolution ofcomplexorganisms.Rather,our studyshowsthatrandommutationand naturalselectioncanproducequite complexfeatures,viamanypathways, providedthattheenvironmentalso
favourssome(butnotall)transitional forms,evenwhenthetransitionalforms arefavouredforperformingdifferent functionsfromthosethatevolvelater’.
TheLimitstoTruth
Formanyotherbiologists,however, digitalevolutionseemstohavevery littlerelevance.OneeminentBritish evolutionarybiologistdismissedthe researchinjusteightwords,according totheield’sgodfather,TomRay.‘His comment:“It’sjustnotbiology.Period. Endofdiscussion’’.That’sthewhole storyrightthere’,recallsRay.
Lessstridentreservationsconcern thelimitsoncomplexitythatthevirtual worldimposesandsuspicionsaboutthe abilityofdigitalprocessingtomirror evolutionaryprinciplesaccurately.For FranciscoAyala,professorofbiological sciencesattheUniversityofCalifornia, Irvine,itappearstobesimplya questionoftrustinthenaturalworld. ‘Computerscangiveyouonlywhatyou putin’,hesays.‘Withnaturalmodels, you’renotputtinganythingin—you’re segregatingasmallregionasanaspect ofreality’.
Therearealsomoremundane worriesoverthetechnicalskillsneeded forthecomputationaloperations, afearacknowledgedbyLenski. ‘Computationalskillsarecertainly openingupsomeexcitingnew directions[inevolutionarybiology]’, hesays,‘butthereareofcoursemany otherusefulskillsandfascinating directions’.AtCaltech,meanwhile, Adami’steamistryingtomakeAvida easiertouse,backedbytheNational InstitutesofHealth’sirst-everfunding fordigital-lifework.
Misunderstandingsaboutthe technologyariseoverwhether theresearchisan‘instance’ora ‘model’ofevolution,suggestsRay, whonowdivideshistimebetween theAdvancedTelecommunications ResearchLaboratoriesinKyotoand theUniversityofOklahoma,wherehe holdschairsinzoologyandcomputer science.‘Ineverintended[Tierra] asamodel,butthat’sthewayalotof peoplesawitbecausetheyweren’t reallypreparedforthisnewidea, thisdifferentperspectiveofanother instanceoflife’,hesays.‘Theyhada moretraditionalviewofwhatyoudo withacomputer,whichisthatyousend e-mail,youprocessthings,andyou makemodels’.
Box1.ImpossibleEvolutionaryExperiments
RichardLenskiisusingdigitalorganismstodo`impossible’evolutionaryexperiments.In one,hesays,`wetesteveryincipientmutationbeforeitoccursinapopulationandthenallow itordisallowit,dependingonitsitnesseffect,toseehowimportantneutralanddeleterious mutationsareforlong-termadaptation’.Lenski,professorofmicrobialecologyatMichiganStateUniversity,sayshismindboggles athowdigitalevolutionopensupsomanyavenuesforresearch.`Isometimesfeellikeakidin acandystorewhomightstarvebecausehecan’tmakeuphismindwhathewants’.
Theseopportunitiesand,attheotherend,theprospectofhavingtoomuchdatatoanalyse, whichLenskiadmitsisastrangethingforanevolutionarybiologisttocomplainabout, enforceadisciplinetoprioritiseanddeineobjectives:`WhatexactlyisthehypothesisIwant totest,andwhatexactlymustImeasuretotestthathypothesis?’
Suchenthusiasmforthetechnologymakesitdificultforhimtounderstandwhysome biologistsmightdismissdigitalevolutionas`veryinterestingbutwithnovalue’orturntheir backsonitaltogether.`Myownview’,saysLenski,`isthatsomethingthatisveryinterestingis alsoworththinkingaboutandexploringmorefully,especiallywhenitofferstheopportunity toexaminecomplexproblemsingreaterdepthandwithmoreprecisionthanisotherwise possible’.
Buthecautionsagainstmistakinghisenthusiasmforstudyingdigitalorganismsasacall toabandonotherlinesofresearch.`There’sobviouslymuchofvalueforunderstanding evolutionthatcomesfrommanydifferentempiricalandtheoreticalperspectives’,hesays. `That’sonereasonthatevolutionarybiologyissuchavibrantieldrightnow’.
Lenskistillspendsasmuchresearchtimeonbacteriaashedoesondigitalorganisms. `Althoughit’ssometimesfrustratingnottobeabletodevote100%toeachsystem,each oneissointerestingtomethatIcouldn’tbeartodropeitherofthem’.Thetwosystemshave differentstrengthsandlimitations,whichLenskitriestoexploitinhisresearch,hesays.
Fromhislaboratory’sstudiesonlong-termE.colipopulations,heandhiscolleagues showedearlierthisyearhowtheyusedgene-expressionarraystoworkbackwardstoasetof keymutationsinaglobalregulatorygene.Morerecentwork,currentlybeingwrittenup,`has ledustosomeadaptivemutationsinseveralotherkeyloci’,henotes.
AsforhisdigitalresearchusingtheAvidasoftwaresystem,Lenskiacknowledgesthat speedisanobviousadvantage,butnotthemostsigniicantone.`Anevenmoreimportant advantageistheabilitytoobservethedynamicsanddissecttheoutcomesofevolutionwith absoluteprecision.Forexample,therearenomissinglinksinthedigitalworld’.
Volume1|Issue1|Page014
PLoSBiology|http://biology.plosjournals.org PLoSBiology|http://biology.plosjournals.org Volume1|Issue1|Page015
Levelsofveracitydeterminelimits ofextrapolation,saysRay.‘Digital evolutionisanabstraction,andit’snot goingtobeabletotelluswhathumans willevolveintoorwhydinosaurs wentextinctorwhatwillbethenext emergingdisease....Youneedthewhole planettodothatkindofmodelling’. Butonceyouappreciatethe
constraints,‘it’saphenomenallygood tool,becauseit’sevolutioninabottle. Youcaninstrumentit100%’,henotes. ‘IthinkLenskiandAdamihavedonea verygoodjobofdevelopingitthatway’. Rayhimselfisnowmoreinterestedin genomicsandpharmacologyandtheir applicationinabiologicallyinspired engineeringprojecttodesignsoftware agents,or‘virtualcreatures’,ashe termsthem.
ForLenski,experimentswithAvida provide‘bothan“instance’’anda “model’’ofevolution’.Hesaysthat ‘populationsofthedigitalorganisms reallydoevolveandadapt,albeit inanunfamiliarphysicalrealm.At thesametime,theyprovideasortof experimentalmodelfortestingand understandingthegeneralprinciplesof evolution’.
AndheagreeswithRaythatdigital evolutionisnotintendedtoexplain howwegotwherewearetoday,‘in thesenseofunravellingwhichspecies aremorerelatedtowhichother species,orwhatorganismalfeatures areadaptiveforwhatpurposes,and soforth’.Thegoal,saysLenski,isto examineevolutionaryprocessesand dynamicsingreaterdepthanddetail thanareotherwisepossible.‘Watching aprocessasitoccursandbeingableto probegeneticdetailsandmanipulate environmentalvariablescanprovide newinsightsandevidencethatone cannotgetbycomparativestudiesthat typicallyrequireonetoinferhistorical processesfrompresent-daypatterns’.
TheFirstStepstoFreedom
Suchdevelopmentsfascinateand enthralPaulRainey,anevolutionary ecologist,eventhoughherarelyneeds anycomputingpowerforhisresearch andrecognisesthatdigitalevolution stilllacksanecologicaldimension. Rainey,whoearlierthisyearmoved fromOxfordtobecomeprofessorof ecologyandevolutionattheUniversity ofAuckland,usesbacterialpopulations ofPseudomonasluorescens,whichgrow fromsinglegenotypesinpristinetubes,totestlong-standinghypothesesabout thecausesofecologicaldiversiication. ‘Thebottomlineisthatwe’rereducing thecomplexityweseeintherealworld toamuchmoremanageablelevel’,he says.‘Thenicethingaboutbacterial populationsisthatecologicaland evolutionarytimescalescoincide,so thatyoucanactuallyseetheecological
contextofevolutionarychange’. Rainey,afriendandcolleagueof Lenski’s,wouldwelcomethechance totakeadvantageofthespeed, robustness,andlexibilityofdigital evolutiontofurtherhisresearch,but doubtswhetherthetechnologywill everbeabletomatchtheperformance ofhis‘wet’laboratory.Thoughhis naturalmodelissimple,itremainsfar toocomplextoprogram,hesuspects. ‘Wetrytounderstandhowselection isworkinginthisverycomplex ecologicalcontext,whichincludes interactionsbetweengenotypesand withingenotypesandinteractions withanenvironmentthatisconstantly changing’,hesays.‘Thissetsthescene forselection,andtheselectiveforces areconstantlychanging....Noneofthat complexityisreallycapturedinAvida’.
ButRaineyisinforasurprise, accordingtoAdami.‘Thepaceof developmentofAvidahasaccelerated’, hesays.‘Morepeopleareworking onitbecausewehavebiggergrants. AndCharlesOfria[whohelpedto designthesoftwareasapostgraduate atCaltech]isdoingmuchofthe developmentatMichiganState [University,whereheisnowassistant professorofcomputerscienceand engineering]withhisstudents’. TheresultisthatAvidianshave madetheirirststepstowardssexual freedomwithinecologicallydiverse environmentsor,moreaccurately,code recombinationsinamulti-nichevirtual world.
Foralmostadecade,saysAdami, Avidahasbeenasingle-nicheworldin whicheveryorganisminthepopulation seesexactlythesameworldandonly asinglespeciesinhabitsthatworld.
ButAvidahasnowbeenexpanded, hecontinues,‘insuchamanner thatpopulationscanseedifferent typesofworldsandtheycanadapt independentlytodifferentresources’. Aresearchpaperisbeinginalised onhowthesoftwareismakingits irststepstowardsincorporatingthe notionofevolutionaryecology.‘We showwhatpressuresarenecessaryto makeapopulationthatishomogenous branchoutandspeciateintoastable system’,notesAdami.‘Nowwewantto explorerecombination,whichwe’ve alwaysshiedawayfrom.’Withasexual reproductionvirtuallyunderstood,the researchersarereadytotacklesexual reproductioninthedigitalworld,says Adami.‘Somepeoplearefuriously workingatimplementingthat.’
‘Ourgoalisnottomimicnatural systemsindetail,butrathertoexpand Avidatogivedigitalorganismsaccess tomoreofthebasicprocessesoflife’, saysLenski.‘Ourgoalisnotsomuch toendowtheancestralorganismswith additionalcapabilities,butratherwe wanttoseehowdigitalorganismswill evolveiftheyareplacedinanaltered worldwheresuchthingsassexand communicationarephysicallypossible. Iseemanyyearsofinterestingresearch alongtheselines’.
Relectingonfutureapplications fortheresearch,Lenskisuggests ithighlightshowthetraficin
computationalbiologyisnowbecoming asigniicantandlittlerecognisedtwo-wayexchange.Computerscientistsare notonlyhelpingbiologiststoorganise andanalysetheirvastdatasets,says Lenski,but‘biologicalprinciples,from evolutionandgeneticstoneurobiology andecology,areinformingcomputer scientistsandengineersindesigning softwareandhardware...andthatholds tremendouspromiseforthefuture’.
‘It’saphenomenallygood
tool,becauseit’sevolutionin
abottle.’
FurtherReading
ElenaSF,LenskiRE(1997)Testofsynergistic interactionsamongdeleteriousmutationsin bacteria.Nature390:395--398.
ElenaSF,LenskiRE(2003)Evolutionexperiments withmicroorganisms:Thedynamicsandgenetic basesofadaptation.NatRevGenet4:457--469. LenskiRE,OfriaC,CollierTC,AdamiC(1999)
Genomecomplexity,robustness,andgenetic interactionsindigitalorganisms.Nature400: 661--664.
LenskiRE,OfriaC,PennockRT,AdamiC(2003) Theevolutionaryoriginofcomplexfeatures. Nature423:139--144.