Premium
Computing the Extended Synthesis: Mapping the Dynamics and Conceptual Structure of the Evolvability Research Front
Author(s) -
Nuño de la Rosa Laura
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
journal of experimental zoology part b: molecular and developmental evolution
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.823
H-Index - 63
eISSN - 1552-5015
pISSN - 1552-5007
DOI - 10.1002/jez.b.22741
Subject(s) - evolvability , evolutionary theory , evolutionary dynamics , field (mathematics) , epistemology , modern evolutionary synthesis , discipline , computer science , conceptual framework , evolutionary developmental biology , scientific field , set (abstract data type) , data science , sociology , management science , evolutionary biology , biology , social science , mathematics , philosophy , work (physics) , mechanical engineering , population , demography , pure mathematics , engineering , economics , programming language
Since the late 1970s, the field of evolutionary biology has undergone empirical and theoretical developments that have threaten the pillars of evolutionary theory. Some evolutionary biologists have recently argued that evolutionary biology is not experiencing a paradigm shift, but an expansion of the modern synthesis. Philosophers of biology focusing on scientific practices seem to agree with this pluralistic interpretation and have argued that evolutionary theory should rather be seen as an organized network of multiple problem agendas with diverse disciplinary contributors. In this paper, I apply a computational analysis to study the dynamics and conceptual structure of one of the main emerging problem agendas in evolutionary biology: evolvability. I have used CiteSpace, an application for visualizing and analyzing trends and patterns in scientific literature that applies cocitation analysis to identify scientific specialities. I analyze the main clusters of the evolvability cocitation network with the aim to identify the main research lines and the interdisciplinary relationships that structure this research front. I then compare these results with the existing classifications of evolvability concepts, and identify four main conceptual tensions within the definitions of evolvability. Finally, I argue that there is a lot of usefulness in the inconsistency in which the term evolvability is used in biological research. I claim that evolvability research has set up “trading zones” in biology that make possible interdisciplinary exchanges.