Mechanism of the Speciation - A Hypothesis

Mechanism of the Speciation. (A Hypothesis) Ara Arutunyan, GWU, 2024 Mechanism of natural evolution and the existence of variety of species on Earth is explained by Darwin. There are several mechanisms of speciation, the main of which is the divergence- the departure of new generations from their ancestor’s territory to new habitats (Speciation through divergence), thus, separating and establishing themselves as a new species in new conditions. Darwin and current Darwinism do not explain the explicit mechanism by which the new species are formed and the connection with the ancestors is broken. The molecular mechanisms of the discreteness (in other words, the separateness of the species from one another) are still unknown in detail. In essence, we do not know why the whole spectra of the intermediate transitional species do not exist. Mathematical simulations of the Darwinian process of the evolvement of new species and the discreteness of species are mainly represented by such types of pictures- A1 and A2 (taken from the same article, devoted to the problem of evolutionary branching, or adaptive speciation, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895717708002495) . In simulation A1, the split of a species into two is presented. In A2the split into multiple species from an ancestor is modeled. Both illustrations seem realistic, with the distinctive minimums between the species somehow accenting the discreteness of the species. However, there is a simple but remarkable discrepancy (possibly because the authors are not biologists but mathematicians): The simulations and most of theory of speciation https://shorturl.at/DUFqf ignore the central postulate of Darwinian theory- "Speciation through divergence." In other words, the new species do not neglect the existence and further life of parental species. However, parental species disappear in both simulations, which contradicts the biology itself. In our times, we witness hundreds of million-year-old species that still exist, though it is well known that they gave birth to other progressing species by remaining practically the same. The more realistic picture would be the branching of new species from parentals in a way that parental forms mostly continue to exist. Thus, the simulations visually show how the species evolve but do not explain the processes' details or answer the central question of why the species are discrete. I hypothesize that: ( In Fig 1 and 2 I present my version and description of the formation of new species in 2D. ) 1-According to Geodakyan's theory of sexual functional asymmetry, predominantly the males acquire new genes and move to a new territory or functions and survive using other than parental forms, resources of the environment. Thanks to the new mutation acquired in the paternal environment, this male is better adapted to the new conditions than other offspring from the parental forms. Fig 5. Black (A) and red (F) solid Gaussian curves represent parental and new species. Bn-Dm, intermediate, transitional forms, which appear and disappear during the formation of new species. Dotted Gaussian curves (BnDm) are transition forms. Blue lines σ represent standard deviations. B-CD-represent diverged from A consecutive generations with new genes due to single or several mutations. Males from entity A and consecutive B and C, mate with the females from A, B, and C correspondingly. At C, specific to new species, gene-morphological “averaging”- “speciagence” occurs due to increased inbreeding within the new pool of transited males and females. 2-Since there are no modified females like him in the new environment, the male goes back to the paternal territory, (environment) mates with the female of the paternal zone, passes a new gene to the new generation and, thus preserving for his offspring a slight positive adaptation deviation from the territory (environment) of his parents. In the scheme this phenomenon is formalized by the male and female symbols and their relations. In the case of species living in 3D space (birds and fish), due to the females' prevailing sexual freedom, females can also go into new environments and mate or choose the genetically changed, advanced, desired male in the same environment, thus giving birth to colorful species of coral reefs and birds in colorful tropical areas. The permanent mating of the mutated male with the still unmodified female of the parental area ensures the transition of the new gene to more and more generations. (The Bn in the picture explicitly represents this process. The male transited and, living in the new area (or functioning by the new resources), mates with the female of the paternal area.) Thus, a moment comes when the number of individuals of new generations with new genes in the new residence (or functional) area is already large, and the male does not return to the paternal area but mates with the modified females in the new (territorial or resourceful) area. Moreover, at some transition point, reproductive isolation beginsadvanced males and females are so separated morphologically that they can no longer mate with their partners in the paternal area. 3- And so on, during many generations, thanks to the favorable mutations acquired by males, the species mutate / those who are not adapted, simply perish, die, and disappear. That is why, according to some mechanism, the number of males is increased in almost all species in each new generation. According to Geodakyan’s favorite quote: “Males are the “casualties-victims” of evolutionary progress.” Due to inbreeding at Cn, genetic compatibility with its ancestors ends. From that moment on, the process of divergence stops, and due to inbreeding, a new process of unifying genes begins. As far as I know, this process has yet to be described in biology and has no special term. (There is the term convergence, but it has nothing to do with this process - it explains something completely different). Let's call it Speciagence by combining the words speciation and "averaginghomogenization". Thus, generalizing the picture, one can say that the divergence is carried by male mutations, and speciagence-by inbreeding. Fig 2 depicts the final stage of divergence, Step by step, in each new generation, the individuals with extremes disappear, thus giving birth to a new Gaussian “sharp” entity (F)the pool of a new species. Due to the internal mating of males and females with new qualities at Cn, the number of individuals with polar qualities decreases, and the dispersion of individuals with extreem qualities narrows. Eventually, all intermediate forms disappear due to the inbreeding in consecutive generations. A similar process goes on with the leftovers of intermediate forms Bn, which didn't reach stage C. By inbreeding with parental forms, they disappear as the result of "back averaging." Thus, the reproductive isolation between the parental and new species occurs due to the averaging of intermediate forms into new and parental species. Description of this scheme relies on Geodakyan's Еvolutionary theory of asymmetry, which states that the main contributor to the divergence process is the male, who acquires new genes at the expense of some populational sacrifice. The males with adverse survival and fitness genes disappear, while the ones with positive qualities prosper by giving more offspring and spreading the acquired genes to new generations. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03081079.2015.1032529 What is the difference between what I presented and what is drawn in A1 and A2 or any other similar simulation? The simulation drawings do not show the internal biological mechanisms of the speciation. My proposal is founded on Geodakyan's theory (Evolutionary theory of sexes), without which no speciation is possible. (If both sexes acquire new genes equally, no new species would exist. In that case, even the divergence would be impossible because all mutated forms are in the same space or are surviving on the same resources; they all change together due to the permanent averaging of the qualities.) In this context, it is important to stress also that the speciation process differed for humans. We did not leave the territories of our ancestors but speciated in the same territories by destroying the weak among us. We qualitatively changed and formed a new kind of conscious human being, described here. https://shorturl.at/oLTAp 

Mechanism of the Speciation. (A Hypothesis) Ara Arutunyan, GWU, 2024 Mechanism of natural evolution and the existence of variety of species on Earth is explained by Darwin. There are several mechanisms of speciation, the main of which is the divergence- the departure of new generations from their ancestor’s territory to new habitats (Speciation through divergence), thus, separating and establishing themselves as a new species in new conditions. Darwin and current Darwinism do not explain the explicit mechanism by which the new species are formed and the connection with the ancestors is broken. The molecular mechanisms of the discreteness (in other words, the separateness of the species from one another) are still unknown in detail. In essence, we do not know why the whole spectra of the intermediate transitional species do not exist. Mathematical simulations of the Darwinian process of the evolvement of new species and the discreteness of species are mainly represented by such types of pictures- A1 and A2 (taken from the same article, devoted to the problem of evolutionary branching, or adaptive speciation, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895717708002495) . In simulation A1, the split of a species into two is presented. In A2- the split into multiple species from an ancestor is modeled. Both illustrations seem realistic, with the distinctive minimums between the species somehow accenting the discreteness of the species. However, there is a simple but remarkable discrepancy (possibly because the authors are not biologists but mathematicians): The simulations and most of theory of speciation https://shorturl.at/DUFqf ignore the central postulate of Darwinian theory- "Speciation through divergence." In other words, the new species do not neglect the existence and further life of parental species. However, parental species disappear in both simulations, which contradicts the biology itself. In our times, we witness hundreds of million-year-old species that still exist, though it is well known that they gave birth to other progressing species by remaining practically the same. The more realistic picture would be the branching of new species from parentals in a way that parental forms mostly continue to exist. Thus, the simulations visually show how the species evolve but do not explain the processes' details or answer the central question of why the species are discrete. I hypothesize that: ( In Fig 1 and 2 I present my version and description of the formation of new species in 2D. ) 1-According to Geodakyan's theory of sexual functional asymmetry, predominantly the males acquire new genes and move to a new territory or functions and survive using other than parental forms, resources of the environment. Thanks to the new mutation acquired in the paternal environment, this male is better adapted to the new conditions than other offspring from the parental forms. 2-Since there are no modified females like him in the new environment, the male goes back to the paternal territory, (environment) mates with the female of the paternal zone, passes a new gene to the new generation and, thus preserving for his offspring a slight positive adaptation deviation from the territory (environment) of his parents.This phenomenon in the scheme is formalized by the male and female symbols and their relations. In the case of species living in 3D space (birds and fish), due to the females' prevailing sexual freedom, Fig 5. Black (A) and red (F) solid Gaussian curves represent parental and new species. Bn-Dm, intermediate, transitional forms, which appear and disappear during the formation of new species. Dotted Gaussian curves (BnDm) are transition forms. Blue lines σ represent standard deviations. B-CD-represent diverged from A consecutive generations with new genes due to single or several mutations. Males from entity A and consecutive B and C, mate with the females from A, B, and C correspondingly. At C, specific to new species, gene-morphological “averaging”- “speciagence” occurs due to increased inbreeding within the new pool of transited males and females. females can also go into new environments and mate or choose the genetically changed, advanced, desired male in the same environment, thus giving birth to colorful species of coral reefs and birds in colorful tropical areas. The permanent mating of the mutated male with the still unmodified female of the parental area ensures the transition of the new gene to more and more generations. (The Bn in the picture explicitly represents this process. The male transited and, living in the new area (or functioning by the new resources), mates with the female of the paternal area.) Thus, a moment comes when the number of individuals of new generations with new genes in the new residence (or functional) area is already large, and the male does not return to the paternal area but mates with the modified females in the new (territorial or resourceful) area. Moreover, at some transition point, reproductive isolation beginsadvanced males and females are so separated morphologically that they can no longer mate with their partners in the paternal area. 3- And so on, during many generations, thanks to the favorable mutations acquired by males, the species mutate / those who are not adapted, simply perish, die, and disappear. That is why, according to some mechanism, the number of males is increased in almost all species in each new generation. According to Geodakyan’s favorite quote: “Males are the “casualties-victims” of evolutionary progress.” This transition represents how the connection of genetic compatibility with its ancestors ends. From that moment on, the process of divergence stops, and due to inbreeding, a new process of unifying genes continues (processes at Cn). As far as I know, this process has yet to be described in biology and has no special term. (There is the term convergence, but it has nothing to do with this process - it explains something completely different). Let’s call it Speciagence by combining the words speciation and “averaging-homogenization”. Fig 2 presents the final stage of divergence, Step by step, in each new generation, the individuals with extremes disappear, thus giving birth to a new Gaussian “sharp” entity (F)the pool of a new species. Due to the internal mating of males and females with new qualities at Cn, the number of individuals with polar qualities decreases, and the dispersion of of individuals with extreem qualities narrows. Eventually, all intermediate forms disappear due to the inbreeding in several generations. During a similar process, the leftovers of intermediate forms Bn, which didn't reach stage C, with the same inbreeding process with parental forms, disappear as the result of “back -averaging." Thus, the reproductive isolation between the parental and new species occurs due to the averaging of intermediate forms into new and parental species. Another conclusion is that the divergence is carried by male mutations, and speciagence- due to inbreeding. Description of this scheme relies on Geodakyan's Еvolutionary theory of asymmetry, which states that the main contributor to the divergence process is the male, who acquires new genes at the expense of their life. The males with adverse survival and fitness genes disappear, while the ones with positive qualities prosper by giving more offspring and spreading the acquired genes to new generations. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03081079.2015.1032529 What is the difference between what I presented and what is drawn in A1 and A2 or any other similar silulation? The simulation drawings do not show the internal biological mechanisms of the speciation. My proposal is founded on Geodakyan's theory (Evolutionary theory of sexes), without which no speciation is possible. (If both sexes acquire new genes equally, there would be no new species. In that case, even the divergence will be impossible because all mutated forms are in the same space or are surviving on the same resources, and they change all together due to the permanent averaging of the qualities.) The irony with this proposal is that I can't even write a proper manuscript for this idea because I have to read at least a thousand papers on the subject and become an expert in evolutionary biology. Then, if I am still alive, I have to be ready for the editorial rejections of the big scientific bosses. And, if by a miracle it gets accepted by the editor, find ways to dodge the arguments of experts who don't accept even Geodakyan's fundamental pioneering super elegant works today. In this context, it is important to stress that the speciation process differed for humans. We did not leave the territories of our ancestors but speciated in the same territories by destroying the weak among us. We qualitatively changed and formed a new kind of conscious human being, described here. https://shorturl.at/oLTAp