Search

A small number of extraordinary “Major Evolutionary Transitions” (METs) have attracted attention among biologists. They comprise novel forms of individuality and information, and are defined in relation to organismal complexity, irrespective of broader ecosystem-level effects. This divorce between evolutionary and ecological consequences qualifies unicellular eukaryotes, for example, as a MET although they alone failed to significantly alter ecosystems. Additionally, this definition excludes revolutionary innovations not fitting into either MET type (e.g., photosynthesis). We recombine evolution with ecology to explore how and why entire ecosystems were newly created or radically altered – as Major System Transitions (MSTs). In doing so, we highlight important morphological adaptations that spread through populations because of their immediate, direct-fitness advantages for individuals. These are Major Competitive Transitions, or MCTs. We argue that often multiple METs and MCTs must be present to produce MSTs. For example, sexually-reproducing, multicellular eukaryotes (METs) with anisogamy and exoskeletons (MCTs) significantly altered ecosystems during the Cambrian. Therefore, we introduce the concepts of Facilitating Evolutionary Transitions (FETs) and Catalysts as key events or agents that are insufficient themselves to set a MST into motion, but are essential parts of synergies that do. We further elucidate the role of information in MSTs as transitions across five levels: (I) Encoded; (II) Epigenomic; (III) Learned; (IV) Inscribed; and (V) Dark Information. The latter is ‘authored’ by abiotic entities rather than biological organisms. Level IV has arguably allowed humans to produce a MST, and V perhaps makes us a FET for a future transition that melds biotic and abiotic life into one entity. Understanding the interactive processes involved in past major transitions will illuminate both current events and the surprising possibilities that abiotically-created information may produce.

Some immune system cells express type A and/or type B γ-aminobutyric acid receptors (GABAA-Rs and/or GABAB-Rs). Treatment with GABA, which activates both GABAA-Rs and GABAB-Rs), and/or a GABAA-R-specific agonist inhibits disease progression in mouse models of type 1 diabetes (T1D), multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, and COVID-19. Little is known about the clinical potential of specifically modulating GABAB-Rs. Here, we tested lesogaberan, a peripherally restricted GABAB-R agonist, as an interventive therapy in diabetic NOD mice. Lesogaberan treatment temporarily restored normoglycemia in most newly diabetic NOD mice. Combined treatment with a suboptimal dose of lesogaberan and proinsulin/alum immunization in newly diabetic NOD mice or a low-dose anti-CD3 in severely hyperglycemic NOD mice greatly increased T1D remission rates relative to each monotherapy. Mice receiving combined lesogaberan and anti-CD3 displayed improved glucose tolerance and, unlike mice that received anti-CD3 alone, had some islets with many insulin+ cells, suggesting that lesogaberan helped to rapidly inhibit β-cell destruction. Hence, GABAB-R-specific agonists may provide adjunct therapies for T1D. Finally, the analysis of microarray and RNA-Seq databases suggested that the expression of GABAB-Rs and GABAA-Rs, as well as GABA production/secretion-related genes, may be a more common feature of immune cells than currently recognized.