Some Tomatoes Are Evolving Backwards in Real Time, Scientists Find
Here's what you'll learn when you read this story:
Evolution is often portrayed as stepping toward ever-greater complexity, but the natural world is filled with examples of organisms actually reverting back to a previous evolutionary state.
A new study examines this process in progress with tomato plants in Galápagos, finding that plants on the newer, western islands have developed alkaloids similar to eggplant relatives millions of years ago compared to modern tomato plants.
It's possible these plants developed this strategy because the newer islands are barren and less biologically diverse, so the ancient molecule might provide better protection in such a harsh environment.
The famous ape-to-man illustration, known as The March of Progress, depicts evolution as a one-way street toward evolutionary perfection—but nature isn't always so simple.
Many organisms have displayed what appears to be 'reverse evolution,' or regression, where ancient attributes of past ancestors seem to reappear down the evolutionary line. Cave fish, for example, will lose eyesight and return to a state similar to a previous ancestor that lacked this visual organ, but the argument remains whether this is reverse evolution or simply the ending of an evolutionary pathway that creates a vestigial organ.
Of course, complex animals are not the only ones that appear to rewind the evolutionary clock. A new study in Nature Communications, led by scientists at University of California (UC) Riverside, analyzed species of tomato in the Solanaceae family, comparing populations from both eastern and western islands of the Galápagos—that famous Pacific island chain that inspired Charles Darwin's evolutionary theory nearly 200 years ago.
The team specifically analyzed the tomato's alkaloids, a bitter molecule that acts as a kind of pesticide to deter would-be predators and fungi. On the eastern islands, the tomatoes exhibited alkaloids similar to modern tomatoes, but on the western islands—which are geologically younger than the eastern ones—the tomatoes exhibited changes in four amino acids in the enzyme that makes these alkaloid molecules. They found this simple change caused the tomatoes to create alkaloids more similar to eggplant relatives from millions of years ago, seemingly reversing evolution.
'It's not something we usually expect, but here it is, happening in real time, on a volcanic island,' UC Riverside's Adam Jozwiak, lead author of the study, said in a press statement. 'Our group has been working hard to characterize the steps involved in alkaloid synthesis, so that we can try and control it.'
However, this 'reverse' wasn't a spontaneous event. The researchers theorize that the cause of this evolutionary quirk could be traced to the new, western islands themselves. While the eastern islands are millions of years old, the western ones are only hundreds of thousands of years old and are still forming today. This means these islands contain less biological diversity as well as more barren soil. This more ancient landscape may have pushed the tomato to then adopt a more ancient survival strategy.
'It could be that the ancestral molecule provides better defense in the harsher western conditions,' Jozwiak says. 'Some people don't believe in this, but the genetic and chemical evidence points to a return to an ancestral state. The mechanism is there. It happened.'
Whether organisms experience 'reverse' evolution could largely be chalked up to semantics. With both cave fish and Galápagos tomatoes, evolution did its usual work of making life fit for the conditions at hand. Usually that means improving into ever greater complexity, and at other, less often times, it means reverting back to a golden oldie.
You Might Also Like
The Do's and Don'ts of Using Painter's Tape
The Best Portable BBQ Grills for Cooking Anywhere
Can a Smart Watch Prolong Your Life?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
6 hours ago
- Medscape
Alcohol and Pancreatic Cancer: New Evidence About Risk
Does drinking alcohol increase the risk for pancreatic cancer? Researchers have long suspected it does, but the evidence has remained inconsistent. Now, a global study of more than two million people is firming up the case that a link exists. The study, which pooled data from 30 prospective cohorts, found that daily alcohol intake was associated with a 'modest' increased risk for pancreatic cancer in both women and men, regardless of smoking status. However, the extent of the risk depended somewhat on how the researchers modeled alcohol intake. One model, which mapped continuous increases in alcohol consumption, suggested there is no safe dose of alcohol — any amount can increase the risk for pancreatic cancer, though only by 3% for every additional 10 g of alcohol per day or about two thirds of a standard drink. The other model, which compared risk by alcohol volume categories, found that the risk does not become significant until a certain alcohol threshold — about two to three drinks per day for men and one to two for women. Still, overall, 'our findings provide new evidence that pancreatic cancer may be another cancer type associated with alcohol consumption, a connection that has been underestimated until now,' the study's senior author Pietro Ferrari, PhD, head of the Nutrition and Metabolism Branch at International Agency for Research on Cancer, said in a statement. The co-author Jeanine Genkinger, PhD, MHS, had a stronger take on the findings. 'I think this shows that alcohol use is a robust risk factor for pancreatic cancer,' said Genkinger, associate professor, epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York City, noting that even more moderate drinking levels— no more than one drink for women and two for men — might be enough to boost pancreatic cancer risk. How Much of a Risk? The latest data, published in PLoS Medicine, come at a time of increased attention to the alcohol-cancer link. Earlier this year, then-US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, MD, issued an advisory calling for cancer warnings to be added to alcohol labels. Major cancer organizations have determined alcohol to be an established risk factor for seven cancer types : those of the oral cavity, larynx, pharynx, esophagus, liver, breast, and colon/rectum. Despite the strong suspicion that drinking alcohol also contributes to pancreatic cancer risk, this aggressive cancer has not yet made the official list. The major reason is that the evidence surrounding an alcohol-pancreatic cancer link has been deemed 'inconsistent,' 'suggestive,' and 'inconclusive' by expert panels. Studies have been hampered by difficulties separating alcohol use from smoking — a known risk factor for pancreatic cancer — as well as varying findings by alcohol type and geographic location. In addition, certain studies highlighting a link have indicated that any association between alcohol and pancreatic cancer is driven only by more extreme drinking habits — more than four drinks a day, and sometimes as high as nine drinks. The latest analysis, Genkinger said, helps clarify uncertainty surrounding the alcohol-pancreatic cancer link, which is especially important for 'a disease where we don't have that many modifiable risk factors.' The findings are based on cohorts spanning four continents, all part of the Pooling Project of Prospective Studies of Diet and Cancer. Just under 2.5 million cancer-free participants were recruited between 1980 and 2013 (median age, 57 years), of whom 70% were alcohol drinkers, 47% were never-smokers, and 64% were alcohol drinkers and never smokers. Most study participants were from North America (60%), followed by Europe or Australia (32%) and Asia (8%). Alcohol intake was modeled in two ways: continuously for every 10 g/d increase and by volume threshold, using 0.1 to < 5 g/d as the reference for nondrinkers. For context, in the US, the amount of alcohol in a standard drink is defined as 14 g of pure alcohol — equivalent to a 12-ounce can of regular beer, a 5-ounce glass of wine, or a 1.5-ounce shot glass of distilled spirits. Over a median of 16 years, the researchers observed 10,067 incidents of pancreatic cancers. In the continuous model, the risk for pancreatic cancer rose by 3% for every additional 10 g of alcohol consumed per day (hazard ratio [HR],1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04). This association remained consistent and significant among women and men (HR, 1.03 for both), current smokers (HR, 1.03), former smokers (HR, 1.02), and never-smokers (HR, 1.03), and across cohorts from Australia, Europe, and North America (HR, 1.03 for all), though not Asia (HR, 1.00). The research team also found evidence that the type of alcohol mattered: Alcohol from beer and liquor/spirits was associated with a significantly increased risk for pancreatic cancer (HR, 1.02 and 1.04, respectively) but alcohol from wine was not (HR, 1.00). This finding is in line with some previous studies suggesting that wine may have a different relationship with cancer risk compared with other alcoholic beverages. But Genkinger pointed out, this finding could 'reflect the ways in which people tend to drink different types of alcohol.' Wine, she noted, is often part of a meal, and people who favor wine may be less likely to binge drink than those who typically choose other types of alcohol. This study, however, did not survey participants about specific drinking patterns, including binge-drinking. In the threshold model, however, the increased risk only became significant once alcohol intake reached a certain level. For women, drinking one to two standard drinks per day raised their risk for pancreatic cancer by 12% compared with little to no drinking. For men, the threshold was a little higher: Consuming two to four drinks a day was associated with a 15% increase in risk, whereas drinking more than that was tied to a 36% greater risk. Overall, this research contributes to the growing body of evidence that pancreatic cancer should be added to the official alcohol-cancer risk list, according to Alison Klein, PhD, MHS, professor of oncology, pathology, and epidemiology, at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, who was not involved in the research. Having the Conversation The recent Surgeon General's advisory encouraged clinicians to inform their patients that drinking is a cancer risk factor — something unknown to most Americans, according to recent survey findings. 'I think this study is a good reminder to all of us to talk to our patients about their alcohol use,' said Edward Thomas Lewis III, MD, an addiction psychiatrist and clinical assistant professor at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina. Providers can take opportunities for those discussions during routine care, such as when prescribing a medication that can interact with alcohol or when a patient's health condition, such as high blood pressure or heart disease, can be exacerbated by drinking. 'I think these are opportunities to really remind people about moderation,' Lewis said, 'and to talk about some of the individual risk factors that may cause someone to make changes related to their drinking.' It's also possible that drinking might interact with certain genetic variants to modify pancreatic cancer risk — an avenue Klein and colleagues are exploring. What's challenging, Lewis said, is advising patients on what level of drinking is 'Okay,' given that even lower levels of alcohol consumption — around one to two drinks per day — may carry some risk. 'There is no zero-risk alcohol use,' Lewis said. But, he added, people do not necessarily have to abstain to see benefits, either. 'So it may be that a patient, at the end of the day, is able to reduce their alcohol consumption by two or three standard drinks over a given week. That still has a positive net effect,' he said. Another challenge is patients often don't know what a 'standard drink' looks like and can underestimate how much they drink. Showing patients visual examples — such as these— can be an eye-opener, Lewis said. Given the associations between drinking alcohol and many health outcomes, Genkinger said, it's important for clinicians to discuss alcohol use, just as they would discuss physical activity and healthy body weight. 'These are all lifestyle factors that have an impact on numerous disease outcomes, not only pancreatic cancer,' she said.
CNN
7 hours ago
- CNN
A researcher with hearing loss got a grant to study restoring hearing. The Trump administration cancelled it because of DEI
Dr. Uri Manor feels like much of his early life was blessed by fate. Born with genetic hearing loss that enables him to hear only about 10% of what others might, Manor was diagnosed at age 2, when he happened to be living in Wichita, Kansas – the home of what he describes as 'one of the most advanced schools for children with hearing loss, maybe in the world.' 'It wasn't clear if I would ever learn language, if I would ever be able to speak clearly,' said Manor, now 45. 'So I was very lucky, really weirdly lucky, that we were living in Wichita, Kansas, at the time.' Working in Wichita with experts at the Institute of Logopedics, now called Heartspring, Manor learned to speak. That same sort of serendipity led Manor into an unexpected career studying hearing loss himself, first at the US National Institutes of Health and, now, leading his own lab at the University of California, San Diego, where his research into ways to restore hearing was supported by a major five-year NIH grant. But that's where Manor's luck ran out. His grant was terminated in May by the Trump administration as part of its policies targeting diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, initiatives; Manor's funding had been awarded through a program that aimed to promote workforce diversity, for which he qualified because he has hearing loss. Now, Manor's research is in limbo, like that of thousands of other scientists whose work is supported in large part by the federal government and who've been affected by grant terminations. And the halt comes as research into hearing loss, which affects as many as 15% of American adults and 1 in 400 children at birth, had recently shown signs of rapid advancement. It was intense curiosity about the world that led Manor into a career in science, where early on, fate seemed to strike again. As a researcher at the NIH and Johns Hopkins working toward his Ph.D., Manor hoped to find an adviser interested in how magnetic fields could influence cells – an obsession that stemmed from a fascination with animals' ability to navigate using magnetic fields of the Earth. 'I was describing that to a physicist PI [primary investigator] at the NIH, and he goes, 'Yeah, I can't support that project, but what you're describing sounds a lot like the hair cells of the inner ear. You should go talk to this PI, who studies hair cells,'' Manor recalled. Despite spending much of his time at the audiologist's office, he said, 'I'd never thought about the ear.' That PI, Dr. Bechara Kachar, showed him microscope images of hair cells in the inner ear, which enable us to hear, and Manor remembers being stunned. 'I fell in love with the hair cell, these mysterious cells in our ear, because the system was so amazing, how it all comes together and how it all works,' Manor said. 'I got goosebumps. I have hearing loss, and I never thought about studying it. But now I was in this room falling in love with this system. I was like, 'What if this is like my destiny? What if this is what I'm supposed to be doing?'' In 2023, Manor received his first R01 grant from the NIH, a major five-year award that would support his lab's work on ways to restore hearing. Again, serendipity had struck; the R01 grant process is intensely competitive, funding only a fraction of the applications the biomedical research agency gets. Young researchers are advised to apply to research funding programs where they may have a unique edge, to improve their odds, Manor said. There was one that seemed a perfect fit; he was encouraged by mentors to apply to a program at the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders that aimed to promote workforce diversity. It was specifically designed to support early-stage researchers 'from diverse backgrounds, including those from underrepresented groups,' such as people with disabilities. Manor qualified because he has 'congenital severe-to-profound hearing loss,' he said. 'It felt right.' Even at the time, Manor said, he acknowledged the risk that government initiatives supporting DEI may not always be popular. His biggest concern, though, was that he might not be able to renew his grant through the same program after its five years were up. But his luck turned. In late May, he received notification from the NIH that, only two years in, his five-year grant had been canceled. The reason: The Trump administration was targeting programs promoting DEI. 'Research programs based primarily on artificial and non-scientific categories, including amorphous equity objectives, are antithetical to the scientific inquiry, do nothing to expand our knowledge of living systems, provide low returns on investment, and ultimately do not enhance health, lengthen life, or reduce illness,' the notice read. 'It is the policy of NIH not to prioritize such research programs.' No more funding would be awarded, it continued, and all future years on the grant had been removed. 'No one ever imagined that a grant could be canceled in the middle of an award period,' Manor said. 'It might be naïve and incorrect, but when you get a five-year grant from the NIH, that's a five-year contract, and you make plans based on five years. … That's really kind of rocked our world.' A spokesperson for the NIH told CNN: 'The study itself has value, however unfortunately it was funded under an ideologically driven DEI program under the Biden Administration. In the future, NIH will review, and fund research based on scientific merit rather than on DEI criteria.' Manor spent the next two weeks sleeping two to three hours a night, writing new grant proposals to try to replace the lost funds. But the termination meant his lab had to stop experiments, some of which had taken years to set up. Manor took that measure in an attempt to avoid having to lay off staff members – which he ultimately had to do as well. Hearing loss affects more than 30 million people in the US, with prevalence rising as people age. Recently, the field has taken leaps forward, with trials of gene therapies, which deliver working copies of genes to make up for mutated ones that cause deafness, helping children hear for the first time. 'We're at the threshold of a brave new world, so to speak,' said Dr. Charles Liberman, a senior scientist and former director of the Eaton-Peabody Laboratories at Mass Eye and Ear, one of the largest hearing research laboratories in the world. 'It's pretty incredible, the progress that's been made in the last 10 or 15 years, on understanding what goes wrong in the ear and having a pretty good handle on what kinds of approaches might work to cure sensorineural hearing loss.' Liberman anticipates breakthroughs in the next five to 10 years in slowing age-related hearing loss as well and, 'perhaps farther in the future, to actually reverse age-related hearing loss.' Liberman said Manor – with whom he's collaborated in the past – is contributing to the field's advancements. 'He has not been in the field for terribly long, but he's already made a big impression because of the incredible sort of computational approaches he takes to analyzing data from the inner ear,' he said. 'His grant got cut because it was a diversity initiative,' Liberman continued, 'but Uri's research is top quality, and I'm sure it would have been funded just on its own merit.' Manor's was one of thousands of NIH grants cut by the Trump administration, amounting to almost $3.8 billion in lost funding, according to the Association of American Medical Colleges. Others canceled under the banner of combating DEI ideology include those focused on HIV, where researchers reported receiving notification identical to Manor's. But recently, Manor's fortunes seemed to have changed again. A federal judge ruled in June that it was illegal for the Trump administration to cancel several hundred research grants in areas including racial health disparities and transgender health. Manor's is among the grants included, and he received notice that the funding should come through. Still, he said he worries about whether that decision will hold through future court challenges. And he, like so many other scientists affected by the administration's drastic cuts to research funding, warns about the effects on scientific progress. 'No matter what your political leanings are, you have a 1 in 400 chance of having a child with hearing loss,' he said. Anyone dealing with medical conditions 'will benefit from the amazing advances of science and our biomedical research force.' But he also emphasized the importance of recognizing that research like his is supported by taxpayers, some of whom 'are struggling to pay their own bills, who are struggling to pay their kids' doctors bills.' 'And some of their taxpayer dollars are coming to my lab,' he said. 'That's a huge responsibility and privilege, and we have to make sure we're doing good with it. For me, that's a really powerful motivating factor, and I would like to believe that we're doing it.'
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Incredible Australian footage reveals new predator killing city rats
Incredible footage has captured the moment a 1kg native Australian predator attacked a 200g invasive black rat. The aggressor in the video is a rakali, a semi-aquatic native rodent species that's learned how to attack other feral species, including carp and poisonous cane toads. Jenna Bytheway, a senior researcher at Sydney University, led an investigation into the footage, telling Yahoo News she is excited to see the rakali is showing clear signs of actually hunting the smaller rodent as prey. 'Rakali tend to be ambush predators when they're hunting on land or at the water's edge," she said. "In the video, you see it sitting and waiting, and then ambushing. And that suggests it may have been a predatory attack.' There's little chance that a fixed trail camera would have caught an attack like this unless it was happening regularly. And while it's not known if the rakali caught the black rat, a simple attack could impact the abundance of the pests. 'Given the size and aggressive nature of the rakali compared to the black rat, the impacts and the effects of fear can also reduce the number of rats in an area and change how they behave,' Bytheway said. Could rakali help fight $390 billion invasive species problem? The interaction was captured on the banks of Sydney Harbour in 2011 and then archived. But the researchers decided it was time to release the footage now because rakali are facing mounting threats, including the rapid spread of rat lungworm through Queensland and NSW, which originated in southeast Asia and is carried by introduced rats and snails. Habitat destruction, pollution, and poisoning from common household baits commonly sold at hardware stores and supermarkets are also killing off this important species. Despite being found in populated areas along Australia's east coast, very little is known about rakali. And more research would be required to determine how widespread their impact is on invasive species. CSIRO research indicates invasive species have cost Australia more than $390 billion in the last 60 years to 2021. Rats alone continue to cause hundreds of millions of dollars in damage to the agriculture sector every year. But using second-generation anticoagulant rodenticides to tackle them is killing off the nation's wildlife, including owls and eagles. And scientists are increasingly looking towards natural methods of control, like attracting owls to paddocks to eat rats. Incredible discovery at market after common fish purchase Wild photo shows hidden danger in mud Calls for action as road safety project remains incomplete after five years Bytheway is hopeful that one day, rakali could play a role too. But before that, funding would be required to confirm that what happened in the video wasn't a unique occurrence. 'If we can conserve rakali as a native species, not only will they be performing a vital role in the environment, they might be reducing the impacts of invasive species like black rats, cane toads and invasive fish. It's a win-win for everyone,' Bytheway said. The research has been published in the journal Australian Mammalogy and featured in The Conversation. Love Australia's weird and wonderful environment? 🐊🦘😳 Get our new newsletter showcasing the week's best stories.
