Fig 2 The secondary PPS response
The primary PPS response as shown in fig 1 starts with structure responding to the sudden change in the environmental pattern here the structure is the organism it self in the macro evolutionary level responding with a process like migration, resistance etc. In the microevolution level the genome may respond with the process like transposition of a gene and the individual may respond with immunological and hormonal process with antibodies and peptide structures respectively. The cost is not paid in the primary PPS response, as the individual can’t put forth its own selection. The primary response switches over to secondary if the difference in the environmental patterns gets a stable establishment.
The secondary PPS response is supposed to trigger from the established difference in the environmental pattern; here the pattern responding to the difference is the network of relationship established between the components of niche in the macroevolution level and the network of genes in the genomic or the microevolution level. The process here defines the process of cognition, which recognizes the difference of the pattern, and selection as such is the individuals own response based on the undergone cognitive process. The structure here is bracketed separately in the figure showing it to be the manifestation of the process of selection and the cost is the cost paid by the level of hierarchy for its process of selection.
Lamarckism (inheritance of acquired character) failed to survive as it was not fit enough to answer inheritance of acquired character as the cause for evolutionary changes (Jablonka et.al., 1998). Considering population as the instigator of evolution supports Darwinism. But realizing individuals as the cause for evolution (as seen in the next section) will surely reveal Lamarckism as the cause of evolutionary change. Jablonka et.al in their work have shown inheritance of acquired character (Lamarckism) as an out come of instructive process and have suggested epigenetic inheritance system (EIS) as the cause for the Lamarckian inheritance.
We in the present article advocate Lamarckism as an out come of cognitive process and the epigenetic inheritance systems suggested by Jablonka et.al as dynamic PPS interactions taking action for the same. We base our arguments upon the perception that evolution starts at individual level and inheritance is an outcome of those functions of the change in the environmental patterns which are stable and thus trigger the secondary PPS.
The epigenetic inheritance system accounting for the stable inheritance of functional state is of three kinds namely chromatin marking systems, steady state system and structural inheritance system (jablonka et. al.,_____). The chromatin marking system, which mainly deals with the gene expressions and its modifications, can be considered as inheritance of patterns of organization in genome. The steady state system which deals with the positive feed back loops can be considered as the process and finally the preexisting structure which is used as the template for the new structure in daughter cells can be considered as inheritance of structure. Thus far the structural inheritance is reported in the lower eukaryotes (Beisson & sonneborn, 1965) but the carry over of the high concentration of metabolic products and gene products (structures) from one generation to the next can also be considered as structural inheritance in case of higher eukaryotes. In addition to this as the process of cognition deals with the nervous structure we would mention the importance of nervous system as a structure in the process of inheritance. But explanation of this is beyond the scope of the present work.
The further discussion will be based on our perceptions for the importance of interaction between PPS in the maintenance of life forms and its identity.
Perception 1: The process is involved in the embodying systems pattern of organization and structure is the embodiment of the pattern of organization we see that pattern poses/establishes its universality even in process and structure.
Perception 2: The patterns possess the differences and these differences guide the occurrence of a process; structures are always the manifestation of processes (fritjof).
Perception 3: Similar patterns guide similar processes in other words two processes are similar if they have same organizational pattern of their maintenance.
Perception 4: A process forms the basic organizational or fundamental unit of any system. And structure (new or change in the existing one) is either an outcome (new structure) of the process or is influenced (change in the existing one) by the process.
Perception 5: Structures have the property to store memory and this helps to repeat and maintain the similarity of the organizational pattern in the repeated occurrence of a process.
Perception 6: In general a pattern confines another pattern; a process confines another process and likewise a structure confines another structure. The genome, which acquires its specificity for a particular species by the specific genomic pattern, confines yet another pattern of methylation. Feedback, which is a process, confines itself to any other process. Likewise any structure possesses internal structures (which may of course be its internal structural pattern), which imparts its specificity.
Perception 7: The primary PPS can be switched over to secondary PPS in the future generation if the environmental difference is maintained same for the upcoming generation. In the absence of the same environmental difference the effect is just a carry over.
Perception 8: Variations amongst organisms is caused by the varying cognitive abilities of the organisms (and their genome) to respond towards the change in environmental pattern.
Perception 9: Ecologically every living organism represents a structure. Their activities (both social and personal) represent the process and their relationship with other organism that is established with the help of this process represents the pattern.
In the light of Perception 6 and 7 introduced above we assume the epigenetic inheritance system as the PPS response, which is solely guided by the differences in environmental pattern of organization. The similarity within the species lies in possessing similar PPS but as the ability of the organism to perceive and respond towards the given environmental change differs; (based on perception 9) it creates variation within the species. A further out come of this perception is that evolution occurs in the individuals who have the most able cognitive abilities with in the population. This ability of those individuals further creates a difference within the population and guided by that difference the other members of the population follows that individual by the process of learning. Variation still remains as again the ability to learn and respond for the difference once again differ among the individuals of the population.
Cognitive genomeGenome maintains the blue print of all the process and structure involved in the maintenance of organism’s identity. There is either an individual gene or set of genes present in the genome for any structure or structural combination respectively. The metabolic process, which further involves many combination of structures for its regulation and maintenance of the organisms identity is thus having network of genes working in combination. With a particular kind of difference setting in the environmental pattern an organism’s genome can undergo two types of changes.
The first change is from structure to genome, immunological activities are characteristic example for this. It utilizes the primary PPS response and is a sort of immediate response with respect to the sudden change in environmental pattern (niche), which may be unfavorable and quick; this response depends upon the ability of the individual’s genome to resist the change. The second type of response is from genome to structure and depends on long-term setting of the difference in the environmental pattern, this type of response is totally inherited.
All three i.e. pattern, process and structure work in present and they don’t have any cognition of there own. Cognition comes when these three work in combination in a synchronized way. The synchronization of these three makes the process of living a dynamic one and dynamicity is the rule for cognition. Genome is a dynamic system, which comprises of its own pattern of organization process and structure. The pattern of organization in the genome consists of network of gene sequences working for a particular expression. The genomic process consists of replication, transcription, translation, recombination, transposition and repair of the mutational sites. All these processes help in maintenance of genomic identity and thus maintaining the identity of the individual. The structures within the genome are defined by the gene sequences and the repeat sequences, the difference between the two lies on their information contents and pattern of major and minor grooves defined by them where other protein comes and bind. (It is important to understand here that a gene represents a structure in the genome and the pattern of genomic organization is the network of relation a gene makes with other gene for a particular expression). Against the more popular idea of denominating the cell at the first level of organizational hierarchy, our argument based on the cognitive ability of the genome would place it higher in the first place over the cell in the organizational hierarchy. The circular nature of this organizational hierarchy brings genome to the direct contact with the biosphere. This means that we are making genotype rather than the phenotype (cell) directly responsible for perception of any differences present in the environment. Indirectly this also means that there is an inheritance of the acquired character.
Based on the positioning of genome on the organizational hierarchy we now question Darwinism or more specifically natural selection. Darwin’s theory of natural selection is based on the assumption that in the population, for a particular trait there exist both fit and unfit individuals and the difference encountered with the change in environmental pattern is treated as a filter through which the one with the maximum fitness is selected. Darwin’s natural selection acted in the population level and according to Darwin any change in the environment triggers the filter (natural selection process). In the light of cognitive science any difference may trigger the cognitive capabilities of an individual rather than by the force of natural selection. The cognitive capabilities of an individual enable this distinction and thereby foment the process of selection.
The organisms have to pay a cost for primary and secondary response and also for its interaction with other components of the niche. The cost paid for the primary response is the maintenance cost, which is generally paid by cells, tissue, organ and organ system of an individual. In the secondary PPS response the cost paid is the cost of inheritance; here as the metabolic resources are limited the organism has to pay a cost for the changed process in terms of loss of any other process. The selected or rejected structure (which is the manifestation of the process) again creates a difference which if economical for the maintenance of organism’s identity in the changed environmental pattern is passed on to the next generation. The third cost, which the organism has to pay to, its niche and the other levels of hierarchical organization may be known as cost of survival and is borne by the individual and the species together. These three costs are endured either by pattern of organization, process, structure or any combination of the three. Evolution is thus the least cost combinations of all the three costs that the whole level of organization has to pay for the maintenance of its own identity.
The higher levels in the organizational hierarchy, with their biotic and abiotic components once again creates a difference, which is recognized by the genome of an organism, and this makes the whole process a circular one (fig1). The involvement of the biotic components for creating the difference necessitates the co evolutionary studies of different organism inhabiting the same niche. Based on the endured cost we would also like to resolve the process of speciation, which lies in the junction between the microevolution and macroevolution. Organisms possessing similar PPS makes the species, the individuals within the species evolves themselves as a cognitive process and finally pass on a difference which they have created with respect to the past and the present mode of its being if the cost endured by the individuals is economical in maintaining their identity the other members of the species encountering the same difference in the environment follows the individual and form the new group, the genera. The flexibility of individuals for understanding and overcoming the environmental difference and establishing a pattern of relation with other individuals of either same or different species present in the environment in order to maintain its identity determines their intelligence. This means that environment just induces for a behavioral response but the response comes from individual’s own selection depending upon its intelligence and cognitive ability. The survival of the fittest in true sense is the survival of the intelligent. The act of following the few intelligent individuals by a group does not require the same amount of intelligence as is required by the individual to reach its new identity and this helps in the maintenance of the species. The process of speciation can also be visualized as the process of secondary PPS where in the resultant new structure is the new species itself.
Adaptive Inheritance is the process coupled with genomic cognition and the individuals’ intelligent selection in which the individual should not only recognize the difference and maintain its identity in the changed environment but they should also pass it on to its subsequent generation. Based on this perception we see that parthenogenesis or asexual reproduction would have been an economical mode of reproduction among the multicellular organisms in the sense that it does not waste any gamete in production of male and thus ensuring twice the fertility of the individual that produces both kinds of gametes. But this condition is always preferred as a secondary condition and is restricted to an isolated species of genus. The reason for this is the inability of this condition to pass on a difference (variation) to the subsequent generation. For adopting mechanisms for this condition the species following it had to pay heavy cost to the population (the immediate level of hierarchy after species) and the inability of the species to pay this cost made them an isolated genus.
Figure 1 represents the organizational hierarchy level
Genome
Cell
