Selection for Function: From Biological Persistence to Socioecological Systems

Michel Tibayrenc

doi:10.53941/dbgs.2026.100005

Abstract

Selection for Function (SF) offers a complementary perspective on evolving systems whose organization can persist or be reconstructed without reproduction as an integrated unit. This editorial examines its relevance to biological persistence, disease, and socioecological systems. Building on earlier accounts of persistence-based selection, SF directs attention to the causal properties that allow some configurations of components and interactions to endure more successfully than alternatives. Its application requires an explicit focal level, independently identifiable organizational configurations, and a testable contribution of function to persistence. Examples from tumors, microbial communities, and disease-associated social arrangements illustrate both its potential and its limits. Persistence alone does not establish selection, and similar outcomes across biological and social systems need not arise through similar mechanisms. SF is therefore best approached as a comparative framework whose value depends on the explanatory or predictive contribution it makes alongside established evolutionary accounts.

References

1.
Thomas, F; Hamant, O.; Lecointre, G.; et al. Selection for function, persistence, and Darwinian evolution. Peer Community J. 2026, 6, e67. https://doi.org/10.24072/pcjournal.753.
2.
Wong, M.L.; Cleland, C.E.; Arend, D.; et al. On the roles of function and selection in evolving systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2023, 120, e2310223120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2310223120.
3.
Van Valen, L.M. Three paradigms of evolution. Evol. Theory 1989, 9, 1–17.
4.
Bouchard, F. Causal processes, fitness, and the differential persistence of lineages. Philos. Sci. 2008, 75, 560–570. https://doi.org/10.1086/594507.
5.
Bouchard, F. Ecosystem evolution is about variation and persistence, not populations and reproduction. Biol. Theory 2014, 9, 382–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-014-0171-1.
6.
Doolittle, W.F. Natural selection through survival alone, and the possibility of Gaia. Biol. Philos. 2014, 29, 415–423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-013-9384-0.
7.
Bourrat, P. A Pricean formalization of Gaia. Philos. Sci. 2023, 90, 704–720. https://doi.org/10.1017/psa.2023.44.
8.
Boyle, R.A.; Moody, E.R.R.; Babcock, G.; et al. Persistence selection between simulated biogeochemical cycle variants for their distinct effects on the Earth system. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2025, 122, e2406344122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2406344122.
9.
Okasha, S. Evolution and the Levels of Selection; Clarendon Press: Oxford, UK, 2006.
10.
Johnson, C.R.; Boerlijst, M.C. Selection at the level of the community: The importance of spatial structure. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2002, 17, 83–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(01)02385-0.
11.
Odling-Smee, F.J.; Laland, K.N.; Feldman, M.W. Niche Construction: The Neglected Process in Evolution; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2003.
12.
Szathmáry, E.; Maynard Smith, J. The major evolutionary transitions. Nature 1995, 374, 227–232. https://doi.org/10.1038/374227a0.
13.
Bourrat, P. Function, persistence, and selection: Generalizing the selected-effect account of function adequately. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. Part A 2021, 90, 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.09.007.
14.
Babcock, G.; McShea, D.W. An externalist teleology. Synthese 2021, 199, 8755–8780. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03181-w.
15.
McShea, D.W. Four reasons for scepticism about a human major transition in social individuality. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 2023, 378, 20210403. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2021.0403.
16.
Darwin, C. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life; John Murray: London, UK, 1859.

Scilight Press

Author Information

Abstract

Keywords

References

About Scilight

Journals

Publishing Policies

Contact Us