Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

The Evidence for Evolution02:55

The Evidence for Evolution

48.3K
Genetic variations accumulating within populations over generations give rise to biological evolution. Evolutionary changes can result in the formation of novel varieties and entire new species. These changes are responsible for the diverse forms of life inhabiting the planet. The evidence for evolution suggests that all living organisms descended from common ancestors.
48.3K
Convergent Evolution01:54

Convergent Evolution

33.0K
Evolution shapes the features of organisms over time, ensuring that they are suited for the environments in which they live. Sometimes, selection pressure leads to the rise of similar but unrelated adaptations in organisms with no recent common ancestors, a process known as convergent evolution.
33.0K
Eukaryotic Evolution01:24

Eukaryotic Evolution

42.1K
The endosymbiont theory is the most widely accepted theory of eukaryotic evolution; however, its progression is still somewhat debated. According to the nucleus-first hypothesis, the ancestral prokaryote first evolved a membrane to enclose DNA and form the nucleus. Conversely, the mitochondria-first hypothesis suggests that the nucleus was formed after endosymbiosis of mitochondria.
Contrary to the endosymbiont theory, the eukaryote-first hypothesis proposes that the simpler prokaryotic and...
42.1K
Synteny and Evolution02:31

Synteny and Evolution

3.8K
John H. Renwick first coined the term “synteny” in 1971, which refers to the genes present on the same chromosomes, even if they are not genetically linked. The species with common ancestry tend to show conserved syntenic regions. Therefore, the concept of synteny is nowadays used to describe the evolutionary relationship between species.
Around 80 million years ago, the human and mice lineages diverged from the common ancestor. During the course of evolution, the ancestral...
3.8K
Gene Evolution - Fast or Slow?02:05

Gene Evolution - Fast or Slow?

3.7K
No description available
3.7K
Gene Evolution - Fast or Slow?02:05

Gene Evolution - Fast or Slow?

8.2K
The genomes of eukaryotes are punctuated by long stretches of sequence which do not code for proteins or RNAs. Although some of these regions do contain crucial regulatory sequences, the vast majority of this DNA serves no known function. Typically, these regions of the genome are the ones in which the fastest change, in evolutionary terms, is observed, because there is typically little to no selection pressure acting on these regions to preserve their sequences.
In contrast, regions which code...
8.2K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

SERS and supervised learning for proof-of-concept rotavirus detection in wastewater matrices.

Biosensors & bioelectronics·2026
Same author

Modifications of lung microbiota structure in traumatic brain injury ventilated patients according to time and enteral feeding formulas: a prospective randomized study.

Critical care (London, England)·2023
Same author

Evidence-based treatment choices for acute lateral ankle sprain: a comprehensive systematic review.

European review for medical and pharmacological sciences·2022
Same author

A potential risk assessment tool to monitor pathogens circulation in coastal waters.

Environmental research·2021
Same author

Risk of chronic kidney disease in people living with HIV by tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF) use and baseline D:A:D chronic kidney disease risk score.

HIV medicine·2020
Same author

Levels of polychlorinated biphenyls and organochlorine pesticides in donkey milk: Correlation with the infection level by intestinal strongyles.

Chemosphere·2020
Same journal

Developmental Modularity and Pre-Eclosion Sclerotization of the Pronotum Facilitate Eclosion in the Ladybird Beetle, Harmonia axyridis.

Evolution & development·2026
Same journal

Non-Invaginated Wing Primordia in Holometabolous Insects: First Report From Mecoptera.

Evolution & development·2026
Same journal

An Amelogenin Herbivore Motif, a Compacted Enamel Protein Matrix and Prismatic Enamel in Uromastyx Demonstrate Convergent Evolution in an Agamid Masticatory Apparatus.

Evolution & development·2026
Same journal

Exploring the Developmental Origins of Limb Proportion Diversity in Birds: An Analysis of Ontogenetic Timing.

Evolution & development·2026
Same journal

Correction to "The Development of De Villiers' Moss Frog (Arthroleptella villiersi, Pyxicephalidae) Reveals Heterochronic Patterns Underlying the Evolution of Endotrophic Development in Anura".

Evolution & development·2026
Same journal

Complex Wnt-Based Patterning of the Body Plan in the Colonial Hydrozoan Dynamena pumila (Linnaeus, 1758).

Evolution & development·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Feb 9, 2026

Author Spotlight: Unraveling Plant Responses to Abiotic Stresses Using the PlantScreen Robotic Platform
06:28

Author Spotlight: Unraveling Plant Responses to Abiotic Stresses Using the PlantScreen Robotic Platform

Published on: June 7, 2024

2.7K

How many processes are responsible for phenotypic evolution?

G Fusco1

  • 1Department of Biology, University of Padova, Italy. fusco@civ.bio.unipd.it

Evolution & Development
|August 2, 2001
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study redefines evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo) processes. It clarifies that natural selection and random drift are sorting mechanisms, while selection and constraints interact dynamically in phenotypic evolution.

More Related Videos

A Method for Tracking the Time Evolution of Steady-State Evoked Potentials
12:03

A Method for Tracking the Time Evolution of Steady-State Evoked Potentials

Published on: May 25, 2019

8.9K
Molecular Evolution of the Tre Recombinase
12:02

Molecular Evolution of the Tre Recombinase

Published on: May 29, 2008

10.1K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Feb 9, 2026

Author Spotlight: Unraveling Plant Responses to Abiotic Stresses Using the PlantScreen Robotic Platform
06:28

Author Spotlight: Unraveling Plant Responses to Abiotic Stresses Using the PlantScreen Robotic Platform

Published on: June 7, 2024

2.7K
A Method for Tracking the Time Evolution of Steady-State Evoked Potentials
12:03

A Method for Tracking the Time Evolution of Steady-State Evoked Potentials

Published on: May 25, 2019

8.9K
Molecular Evolution of the Tre Recombinase
12:02

Molecular Evolution of the Tre Recombinase

Published on: May 29, 2008

10.1K

Area of Science:

  • Evolutionary Developmental Biology
  • Phenotypic Evolution
  • Ontogeny

Background:

  • Revisiting core evolutionary mechanisms: natural selection, random drift, developmental constraints, and internal selection.
  • Integrating these concepts within the extended framework of evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo).

Purpose of the Study:

  • Shift perspective from
  • evolution of phenotypes
  • to an
  • evolution of ontogenies
  • (evo-devo perspective).
  • Clarify reciprocal relationships among evolutionary processes.
  • Propose a narrower definition for developmental constraints:
  • reproductive constraints
  • .

Main Methods:

  • Conceptual analysis and redefinition of evolutionary terms.
  • Comparative analysis of selection, drift, and constraints.
  • Integration of internal selection within the evo-devo context.

Main Results:

  • Natural selection and random drift identified as post-productional sorting mechanisms for developmental trajectories.
  • Developmental constraint redefined as a compound concept including forms of selection.
  • Internal selection characterized as environment-independent selection based on internal coordination.

Conclusions:

  • Selection and constraints are interacting deterministic forces in phenotypic evolution, not opposing ones.
  • The evo-devo perspective reframes the understanding of how these processes shape ontogenies.
  • A clearer distinction between different types of selection and constraints is crucial for evolutionary studies.