Wednesday, September 03, 2025

 

Groundbreaking study suggests that mutations driving evolution are informed by the genome, not random



Empirical evidence supports a new theory of how mutations arise



University of Haifa




A groundbreaking study published in this week’s issue of PNAS by scientists from Israel and Ghana shows that an evolutionarily significant mutation in the human APOL1 gene arises not randomly but more frequently where it is needed to prevent disease, fundamentally challenging the notion that evolution is driven by random mutations and tying the results to a new theory that, for the first time, offers a new concept for how mutations arise.  

Implications for biology, medicine, computer science, and perhaps even our understanding of the origin of life itself, are potentially far reaching.

A random mutation is a genetic change whose chance of arising is unrelated to its usefulness. Only once these supposed accidents arise does natural selection vet them, sorting the beneficial from the harmful. For over a century, scientists have believed that a series of such accidents has built up over time, one by one, to create the diversity and splendor of life around us.

However, it has never been possible to examine directly whether mutations in the DNA originate at random or not. Mutations are rare events relative to the genome’s size, and technical limitations have prevented scientists from seeing the genome in enough detail to track individual mutations as they arise naturally. To overcome this, Prof. Adi Livnat of the University of Haifa, director of the Sagol Lab for Evolution Research, lead author Dr. Daniel Melamed and the team developed a new ultra-accurate detection method and recently applied it to the famous HbS mutation, which protects from malaria but causes sickle-cell anemia in homozygotes. Results showed that the HbS mutation did not arise at random, but emerged more frequently exactly in the gene and population where it was needed. Now, they report the same nonrandom pattern in a second mutation of evolutionary significance.

The new study examines the de novo origination of a mutation in the human APOL1 gene that protects against a form of trypanosomiasis, a disease that devastated central Africa in historical times and until recently has caused tens of thousands of deaths there per year, while increasing the risk of chronic kidney disease in people with two copies. If the APOL1 mutation arises by chance, it should arise at a similar rate in all populations, and only then spread under Trypanosoma pressure. However, if it is generated nonrandomly, it may actually arise more frequently where it is useful. Results supported the nonrandom pattern: the mutation arose much more frequently in sub-Saharan Africans, who have faced generations of endemic disease, compared to Europeans, who have not, and in the precise genomic location where it confers protection. “The new findings challenge the notion of random mutation fundamentally,” said Livnat.   

From random mutation to natural simplification

Historically, there have been two basic theories for how evolution happens—(1) random mutation and natural selection, and (2) Lamarckism—the idea that an individual directly senses its environment and somehow changes its genes to fit it. Lamarckism has been unable to explain evolution in general, so biologists have concluded that mutations must be random.

Livnat’s new theory moves away from both of these concepts, proposing instead that two inextricable forces underlie evolution. While the well-known external force of natural selection ensures fitness, a previously unrecognized internal force operates inside the organism, putting together genetic information that has accumulated over generations in useful ways.

To illustrate, take fusion mutations, a type of mutation where two previously separate genes fuse to form a new gene. As for all mutations, it has been thought that fusions arise by accident: one day, a gene moves by error to another location and by chance fuses to another gene, once in a great while leading to a useful adaptation. But Livnat’s team has recently shown that genes do not fuse at random. Instead, genes that have evolved to be used together repeatedly over generations are the ones that are more likely to get fused. Because the genome folds in 3D space, bringing genes that work together to the same place at the same time in the nucleus with their chromatin open, molecular mechanisms fuse these genes rather than others. An interaction involving complex regulatory information that has gradually evolved over generations leads to a mutation that simplifies and “hardwires” it into the genome.

In the PNAS paper, they argue that fusions are a specific example of a more general and extensive internal force that applies across mutation types. Rather than local accidents arising at random locations in the genome disconnected from other genetic information, mutational processes put together multiple meaningful pieces of heritable information in many ways. Genes that evolved to interact tightly are more likely to be fused; single-letter RNA changes that evolved to occur repeatedly across generations via regulatory phenomena are more likely to be “hardwired” as point mutations into the DNA; genes that evolved to interact in incipient networks, each under its own regulation, are more likely to be invaded by the same transposable element that later becomes a master-switch of the network, streamlining regulation, and so on. Earlier mutations influence the origination of later ones, forming a vast network of influences over evolutionary time.

“Previous studies examined mutation rates as averages across genomic positions, masking the probabilities of individual mutations. But our studies suggest that, at the scale of individual mutations, each mutation has its own probability, and the causes and consequences of mutation are related,” says Livnat. “At each generation, mutations arise based on the information that has accumulated in the genome up to that time point, and those that survive become a part of that internal information.” This vast array of interconnected mutational activity gradually hones in over the generations on mutations relevant to the long-term pressures experienced, leading to long-term directed mutational responses to specific environmental pressures, such as the malaria and Trypanosoma–protective HbS and APOL1 mutations.

New genetic information arises in the first place, they argue, as a consequence of the fact that mutations simplify genetic regulation, hardwiring evolved biological interactions into ready-made units in the genome. This internal force of natural simplification, together with the external force of natural selection, act over evolutionary time like combined forces of parsimony and fit, generating co-optable elements that themselves have an inherent tendency to come together into new, emergent interactions. “Co-optable elements are generated by simplification under performance pressure, and then engage in emergent interactions—the source of innovation is at the system level,” said Livnat. “Understood in the proper timescale, an individual mutation does not arise at random nor does it invent anything in and of itself.”

Redefining how evolution works

The potential depth of evolution from this new perspective can be seen by examining other networks. For example, the gene fusion mechanism—where genes repeatedly used together across evolutionary time are more likely to be fused together by mutation—echoes chunking, one of the most basic principles of cognition and learning in the brain, where pieces of information that repeatedly co-occur are eventually chunked into a single unit. Yet fusions are only one instance of a broader principle: diverse mutational processes respond to accumulated information in the genome, combining it over generations into streamlined instructions. This view recasts mutations not as isolated accidents, but as meaningful events in a larger, long-term process.

The study was funded by the John Templeton Foundation, the Israel Science Foundation, and the Sagol Network through the Sagol Lab for Evolution Research. The opinions expressed in the publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the John Templeton Foundation.

 

Researchers examine student care culture in small Russian universities




National Research University Higher School of Economics





Researchers from the HSE Institute of Education conducted a sociological study at four small, non-selective universities and revealed, based on 135 interviews, the dual nature of student care at such institutions: a combination of genuine support with continuous supervision, reminiscent of parental care. This study offers the first in-depth look at how formal and informal student care practices are intertwined in the post-Soviet educational context. The study has been published in the British Journal of Sociology of Education.

In recent decades, universities have come to be viewed not only as places for learning and professional training, but also as environments that provide emotional support. In some countries, this shift is described as the therapeutic turn, as alongside academic objectives, universities begin to prioritise students’ psychological well-being. However, in certain cases, supportive care is accompanied by excessive supervision and restrictions on students’ autonomy.

Small non-selective universities in Russia, especially in the periphery, have received little attention in this context. Many of them evolved from former teacher training institutes and continue to play a key role in meeting the educational needs of entire regions. By non-selective universities, the researchers refer to institutions where the average Unified State Exam (USE) admission score is below 70. In the universities examined in this study, it ranges from 60.28 to 66.8. These institutions have lower USE entry requirements than major research universities and enrol many first-generation students. Despite the important social role of such universities, little is known about their internal culture and the daily lives of students. The authors of this study aimed to fill this gap by closely examining how students are cared for in these universities.

Conducted between 2022 and 2024, the research focused on four public universities located in the Altai Republic, Altai Krai, Kamchatka Krai, and Ivanovo Oblast. These institutions enrol between 799 and 2,334 full-time students, with a student–faculty ratio of 10:1 to 16:1, lower than that of major universities.

The researchers observed university life and conducted 135 semi-structured interviews with students, faculty, and administrators, including department heads, deans, and vice rectors. The interviews addressed a broad range of topics, from the educational process and participation in extracurricular activities to personal future plans. Questions about care and support were not asked directly; instead, these themes emerged as participants described the campus atmosphere and their everyday relationships. The researchers observed frequent use of expressions such as children, second family, and like at home, which helped identify the key characteristics of the university culture.

The results revealed a pervasive duality of student care practiced at the universities studied. On one hand, faculty members focus on creating a warm and friendly atmosphere: they know their students by name, take an interest in their lives, and are willing to assist with both academic and personal matters. On the other hand, in the absence of dedicated student support services, faculty members often take on mentoring roles: they explain institutional rules, help resolve conflicts, and support students in difficult situations.

Care and support often take the form of continuous monitoring. The 'grown-ups' track attendance, oversee dormitory behaviour, contact parents, or hold 'parent–teacher conferences.' Even students who are legally adults are treated as 'children' in need of guidance. Notably, all faculty members involved provide this care without additional compensation, which may be influenced by gendered traditions in the teaching profession, as most faculty at the universities studied are women.

In interviews, students often liken the university to their family and faculty members to their parents or 'second mums.' While this can foster trust, it also reinforces a model in which students do not fully transition to independence, continuing instead to live in a system of control reminiscent of secondary school.

'We have shown that in small, non-selective universities, caring for students involves both support and control. These forms are not contradictory but together create a stable system of relationships that largely holds the university community together,' summarises Tatiana Akuneeva, Research Assistant at the Laboratory for University Development of the HSE Institute of Education (IOE).

'These universities combine trusting, emotionally warm relationships between students and faculty with elements of strict supervision, including behaviour monitoring and parental involvement. While this model can promote cohesion and stability within the university community, it also reinforces student dependence and extends a school-like experience,' notes Ksenia Romanenko, Expert at the IOE Laboratory for University Development.

 

 

Scientists identify personality traits that help schoolchildren succeed academically





National Research University Higher School of Economics





Economists from HSE University and the Southern Federal University have found that personality traits such as conscientiousness and open-mindedness help schoolchildren improve their academic performance. The study, conducted across seven countries, was the first large-scale international analysis of the impact of character traits on the academic achievement of 10 and 15-year-olds. The findings have been published in the International Journal of Educational Research.

A child’s school performance can indicate their future educational level, income, and social status. Traditionally, when assessing academic success, the focus has been on cognitive abilities such as memory, logic, and attention.

However, good academic results require more than intelligence. The researchers hypothesised that pupils’ personality traits—such as conscientiousness, openness to new experiences, emotional stability, and the ability to cooperate—could also play a role. To test this, Ksenia Rozhkova, Senior Research Fellow at HSE’s Faculty of Economic Sciences, and Karen Avanesyan, Leading Researcher at SFU’s Academy of Psychology and Pedagogy, analysed data from the OECD Survey for Social and Emotional Skills, conducted in 2019 among schoolchildren in seven countries (Russia, the USA, South Korea, Finland, Turkey, China, and Colombia).

The study examined data from over 44,000 students in two age groups: 10-year-olds and 15-year-olds. The survey assessed the development of pupils’ personality traits, focusing on the Big Five non-cognitive skills: open-mindedness, conscientiousness, extraversion, cooperation, and neuroticism (or emotional instability). These traits are shaped in childhood under the influence of family and environment and tend to persist throughout much of life.

The study showed that conscientiousness and open-mindedness had the most significant positive effects on academic achievement. An increase of one standard deviation in conscientiousness raised the likelihood of being among the top 25% of students by 4 percentage points. This trait encompasses self-discipline, perseverance in completing tasks, and striving for the best possible outcome. Conscientiousness proved important across all cultural contexts. ‘We see that non-cognitive skills have similar effects on academic outcomes in different cultural contexts. In all countries where such empirical studies have been conducted, conscientiousness and emotional stability consistently show a positive impact on educational and labour-market outcomes,’ noted Ksenia Rozhkova, Senior Research Fellow at the HSE Faculty of Economic Sciences.

The second most influential trait was openness to new experiences, open-mindedness, which increased the likelihood by 2.5 percentage points. An intriguing effect was observed with cooperation and willingness to compromise: it followed an inverted U-shaped trend. Cooperation improved academic performance up to an optimal point, after which excessive willingness to collaborate began to reduce the chances of being in the top 25%. According to the authors, this aligns with a psychological phenomenon sometimes referred to as a ‘too good’ trait, where certain socially approved behaviours can start to work against the individual. ‘Perhaps this is due to the difficulty of finding the right balance between individual motivation to tackle tasks and the ability to work as part of a team,’ explained Ksenia Rozhkova.

The authors paid particular attention to how personality traits influence the academic performance of children from different social backgrounds. Numerous studies have shown that school achievement is strongly linked to a family’s financial situation and social status, which account for nearly 20% of the variation in grades.

Being in the bottom 40% of households by income level reduced a pupil’s chances of becoming one of the top students by 12.5 percentage points. However, when the researchers created a model factoring in the impact of personality traits, the likelihood of a child from a low-income family ranking among the best students dropped by only 10.7 percentage points. This suggests that fostering such traits could become one of the key drivers of social mobility, helping to mitigate economic inequality and enabling children from less affluent families to achieve better academic and life outcomes.

The authors emphasise that these findings carry significant implications for education policy. They demonstrate that developing personality traits can serve as an effective tool for reducing educational inequality. Importantly, such qualities can be successfully cultivated through school curricula and educational initiatives.

 

How the Slavic migration reshaped Central and Eastern Europe



Genetic analyses of medieval human remains reveal large-scale migrations, regional diversity, and new insights into early medieval communities




Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology

Pre-Slavic cemetery of Brücken, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany 

image: 

Excavation in 2020 at the pre-Slavic cemetery of Brücken, Mansfeld-Südharz District (Saxony-Anhalt).

view more 

Credit: © Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte




To the point

  • Dramatic population change: Analysis of genome-wide data from more than 550 ancient individuals demonstrates that, during the 6th-8th centuries CE, Eastern Germany, Poland/Ukraine, and the Northern Balkans experienced a major shift in ancestry, with over 80 percent originating from eastern European newcomers.
  • Support from other analysis: An independent study of 18 genomes from the South Moravian region linked to one of the first Slavic-speaking polities confirms this pattern.
  • Regional differences: While genetic turnover was nearly complete in the north, regions like the Balkans saw more mixing between Eastern European incomers and local communities. This diversity of ancestries persists until today in the modern populations of these areas.
  • Integration, not conquest: Genetic evidence shows no sex bias in the migration—entire families and communities seemed to have moved and integrated, rather than just male warriors.
  • Flexible social structure: In Eastern Germany, the migrants brought a new way of social organization, visible in the formation of large patrilinear pedigrees—a stark contrast to the much smaller family units typical of the preceding Migration Period. Meanwhile, in Croatia, early immigrant communities appear to have maintained more traditional or regionally continuous social structures, with less dramatic changes from the patterns seen before the demographic shift.

The spread of the Slavs stands as one of the most formative yet least understood events in European history. Starting in the 6th century CE, Slavic groups began to appear in the written records of Byzantine and Western sources, settling lands from the Baltic to the Balkans, and from the Elbe to the Volga. Yet, in stark contrast to the famous migrations of Germanic tribes like the Goths or Langobards or the legendary conquests of the Huns, the Slavic story has long been a difficult puzzle for historians of the European Middle Ages.

This is partly because early Slavic communities left behind rather little for archaeologists to find: they practiced cremation, built simple houses, and produced plain, undecorated pottery. Perhaps most significantly, they did not leave behind written records of their own for several centuries. As a result, the term “Slavs” itself has been ambiguous, sometimes imposed by outside chroniclers and often mis-used in later nationalist or ideological debates. Where did these people come from, and how did they so thoroughly change the cultural and linguistic map of Europe?

Historians have long debated whether the spread of Slavic material culture and language was driven by a mass migration of people, the gradual “Slavicisation” of local populations, or a combination of both. But the evidence was thin—especially in the crucial early centuries, when cremation made DNA studies nearly impossible and archaeological traces were modest.

How the Slavs transformed Europe

Now, an international research team of researchers from Germany, Austria, Poland, Czechia and Croatia led by the HistoGenes consortium has provided answers with the first comprehensive ancient DNA study of medieval Slavic populations. By sequencing over 550 ancient genomes, the team has revealed that the rise of the Slavs was, at its core, a story of people on the move. Their genetic signatures point to an origin in the region stretching from southern Belarus to central Ukraine—a geographic area that matches what many linguistic and archaeological reconstructions had long suggested. "While direct evidence from early Slavic core regions is still rare, our genetic results offer the first concrete clues to the formation of Slavic ancestry—pointing to a likely origin somewhere between the Dniester and Don rivers" says Joscha Gretzinger, a geneticist from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig and lead author of the study.

The data show that, beginning in the 6th century CE, large-scale migrations carried this Eastern European ancestry across wide areas of Central and Eastern Europe, which caused the genetic makeup of regions like Eastern Germany and Poland to shift almost entirely. Yet the expansion did not follow the model of conquest and empire: Instead of sweeping armies and rigid hierarchies, the migrants built their new societies on flexible communities, often organized around extended families and patrilineal kinship ties. Also, this was not a single, uniform model across all regions. In Eastern Germany, the shift was profound: large, multi-generational pedigrees became the backbone of society, with kinship networks more extensive and structured than the small nuclear families seen in the preceding Migration Period. In contrast, in areas such as Croatia, the arrival of Eastern European groups brought much less disruption to existing social patterns. Here, social organization often retained many features of earlier periods, resulting in communities where new and old traditions blended or persisted side by side. This regional diversity in social structure highlights how the spread of Slavic groups was not a one-size-fits-all process, but rather a dynamic transformation that adapted to local contexts and histories.

“Rather than a single people moving as one, the Slavic expansion was not a monolithic event but a mosaic of different groups, each adapting and blending in its own way—suggesting there was never just one ‘Slavic’ identity, but many.” explains Zuzana Hofmanová from the MPI EVA and Masaryk University in Brno, Czechia, one of the senior lead authors of the study. Notably, the genetic record reveals no significant sex bias in these migrations: entire families moved together, and both men and women contributed equally to the emerging societies. More data will show in the upcoming years how each community adapted, integrated, or reinvented itself in response to both migration and its own local history.

Spotlight on Eastern Germany

In Eastern Germany specifically, the genetic data show an especially striking story. Following the decline of the Thuringian kingdom, more than 85 percent of the ancestry in the region can be attributed to new arrivals from the East. This marks a shift from the earlier Migration Period, when the population was a cosmopolitan mix as best illustrated by the site of Brücken, a richly furnished late antique cemetery from Sachsen Anhalt that displayed a mix of Northern, Central and Southern European ancestry. With the spread of the Slavs, this diversity gave way to a population profile almost identical to modern Slavic-speaking groups in Eastern Europe. Archaeological evidence from cemeteries confirms that these new communities organized themselves around large extended families and patrilineal descent—while women of marriageable age typically left their home villages to join new households elsewhere. Notably, the genetic legacy of these early Eastern European settlers endures today among the Sorbs, a Slavic-speaking minority in Eastern Germany. Despite centuries of surrounding cultural and linguistic change, the Sorbs have retained a genetic profile closely related to the early medieval Slavic populations that settled the region more than 1,000 years ago.

Spotlight on Poland

In Poland specifically, the research overturns earlier ideas of long-term population continuity. Genetic results show that starting in the 6th and 7th centuries CE, the region’s earlier inhabitants—descendants of populations with strong links to Northern Europe and Scandinavia in particular—almost entirely disappeared and were successively replaced by newcomers from the East, who are closely related to modern Poles, Ukrainians, and Belarusians. This conclusion is reinforced by the analysis of some of the earliest known Slavic inhumation graves in Poland, excavated at the site of Gródek, which provide rare and direct evidence of these early migrants. While the population shift was overwhelming, the genetic evidence also reveals minor traces of mixing with local populations. These findings underscore both the scale of population change and the complex dynamics that shaped the roots of today’s Central and Eastern European linguistic landscape.

Spotlight on Croatia

The Northern Balkans specifically present a different pattern compared to the northern immigration area—a story of both change and continuity. Ancient DNA from Croatia and neighboring regions reveals a significant influx of Eastern European-related ancestry, but not a complete genetic replacement. Instead, Eastern European migrants mixed with the region’s diverse local populations, creating new, hybrid communities. Genetic analyses indicate that in present-day Balkan populations, the proportion of this incoming Eastern European ancestry varies considerably but often makes up roughly half or even less of the modern gene pool, highlighting the region’s complex demographic history. The formation of such a mixed community is clearly seen at the site of Velim, where some of the oldest Slavic burials in the region show evidence of both Eastern European migrants and up to 30% local ancestry. Here, the Slavic migration was not a wave of conquest but a long process of intermarriage and adaptation, resulting in the cultural, linguistic and genetic diversity that still characterizes the Balkan Peninsula today.

Independent confirmation in Moravia, Czechia

In an independent study at the same time today published in Genome Biology, supported among others by Czech projects FORMOR and RES-HUM, researchers from Czechia, Germany, Switzerland and UK with a senior leader of Dr. Zuzana Hofmanová found that there was also a population change in Southern Moravia (Czechia) and that also this demographic shift can be linked to the change to the Slavic-associated material culture which originated in modern-day Ukraine. While whole genomes of preceding, Migration-period individuals showed a large genetic diversity, individuals linked with the Slavic-related cultural horizons had affinities to Northeastern Europe, a feature that was not present before.This dataset included an individual, an infant, buried within a very early Slavic context usually only linked to cremations thus narrowing regionally the change in time and associating it to the Prague-Korchak culture. Importantly, the same genetic signal was present not only for individuals from 7th and 8th centuries but was regionally continuous to 9th and 10th century when this region is associated to one of the earliest Slavic polities, Moravian principality, known because of Saints Cyril and Methodius and the first literary Slavic language (Old Church Slavonic) and Glagolithic script they created for their mission among the Moravian Slavs.

A new chapter in European history

This study does not just resolve the historical puzzle how one of the world's largest linguistic and cultural groups came to be. It also offers new perspectives on why Slavic groups spread so successfully, and why they left so few traces of the kinds historians once sought: As medievalist Walter Pohl, one of the senior lead authors of the study, puts it, the Slavic migration represents a fundamentally different model of social organization: “a demic diffusion or grass-root movement, often in small groups or temporary alliances, settling new territories without imposing a fixed identity or elite structures.” Their success may have been due not to conquest but to a pragmatic, egalitarian lifestyle—one that avoided the heavy burdens and hierarchies of the crumbling Roman world. In many places, the Slavs offered a credible alternative to the declining empires around them. Their social resilience, relatively simple subsistence economy, and willingness to adapt made them well-suited to periods of instability, whether caused by climate change or plague.

The new genetic findings support this interpretation. Mostly where early Slavic groups are found in the archaeological and historical record, their genetic traces match: a common ancestral origin, but regional differences shaped by the degree of mixing with local populations. In the north, earlier Germanic peoples had largely moved away, leaving room for Slavic settlement. In the south, the Eastern European newcomers merged with established communities. This patchwork process explains the remarkable diversity found in the cultures, languages, and even the genetics of today’s Central and Eastern Europe. "The spread of the Slavs was likely the last demographic event of continental scale to permanently and fundamentally reshape both the genetic and linguistic landscape of Europe." says Johannes Krause, director at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and one of the senior authors of the study.

With these new results, researchers can finally see beyond the gaps in the written and archaeological record to trace the true scope of the Slavic migrations—one of the most influential yet understated chapters in Europe’s past. The echoes of this history remain today, in the languages, cultures, and even the DNA of millions across the continent.

Undisturbed burial of an adult woman with genetic markers indicating local origin. Grave goods: glass bead jewelry and a cowrie shell amulet. Pre-Slavic cemetery of Brücken, feature 13913:29.

Credit

© Landesmuseum für Vorgeschichte


Aerial view of the Velim burial site in Croatia.

Credit

© Archaeological Museum Zadar