Journal of Ecosystem & Ecography
Open Access

Evolution; Folate; Migration; Human; Africa; Clothing; Louse; Technology; Vitamin D

Introduction

In the modern world, it is simple to take the speed and convenience of travel for granted and to accept the quickening rate of social change while overlooking the influence of evolutionary biology on our prehistoric predecessors and its continuing impact on vitamin D levels. The rate of evolution in biological systems is limited, while human technology advancement is significantly more fast than evolution. For instance, take into account the possibilities of quantum computing and Moore’s law, which was developed just 50 years ago and describes the exponential rise in complexity of computer integrated circuits. Contrary to such advancements in technology, the evolutionary story began millions of years ago. Contrary to such advancements in technology, the evolutionary story began millions of years ago. In relation to vitamin D, this review discusses some of the prehistoric evolutionary changes to skin’s structure and function [1].

Our capacity to modify biology and produce living systems with new functions has undergone a revolution in recent decades. However, there are still a number of barriers that prevent us from fully utilizing biology. These result from the fact that engineering life’s constituents is impossible without also engineering its fundamental characteristics its capacity to evolve. Designing biological systems is fundamentally different from engineering other mediums because of evolution. We cannot just apply standard engineering design ideas to biology and treat evolution as an afterthought in order to be effective. Since evolution is the only explanation for everything in biology, evolution must play a major role in any engineering theory of biology. When building biosystems, evolution presents both a challenge and an opportunity. On the one hand, it is a negative force that, through genetic diversity, can undermine the painstaking intentions of an engineer. Engineers are particularly concerned about loss of function since, when employed, designed biosystems cannot avoid evolution and there are frequently selection factors that work against the function of the design. We must have the skills to construct evolutionarily resilient biosystems that can function even in the face of inescapable evolutionary forces [2, 3].

On the other hand, engineers have long taken use of the fact that evolution is a very powerful problem solver. Directed evolution, for instance, can be used to improve or even create entirely new features in proteins or cells. These techniques, however, rely on evolution’s capacity to come up with answers in an acceptable amount of time. The starting point in this procedure must have the ability to produce useful phenotypes very soon because the search space is so large for most systems [4].

Even during system operation, evolution might be used as a feature. As an illustration, consider adaptable systems that change in response to environmental stimuli or evolvable genetic circuits that can be built with particular classes of phenotype that are attained as required through evolutionary change. It is essential that the biological design be especially evolvable in order to construct such systems. It must therefore be capable of producing the desired phenotypes from a single starting point in an acceptable amount of time [5].

Our moral need to gain a deeper grasp of how synthetic biosystems will keep evolving if introduced into our bodies or the larger environment is even more important. It is commendable that the field has worked to create tools with fail-safes like kill switches or metabolic dependencies to slow down and mitigate evolution. However, we run the risk of these technologies having unforeseen flaws with disastrous but preventable effects if we lack a solid theoretical knowledge of how synthetic biosystems might continue to evolve after being put into use. Even reproduction has occasionally had negative effects. Notably, the unintentional development of the aggressively hyperactive Africanized bee, which has had a detrimental effect on both people and the environment. These worries will only grow in importance when we create technologies like gene drives18 that are capable of even more rapid genetic alteration [6, 7].

The traditional engineering professions’ belief that the designed artefact is the culmination of the design process is at the heart of many of these problems. This viewpoint contradicts biology. Instead, we think that a fresh viewpoint one that views a created biosystem as the first in a long series of potential outcomes is required for really effective engineering of biology. Despite the fact that much of evolutionary biology has focused on the past of organisms, bioengineers must think about the present and, more particularly, how a biosystem will continue to evolve if it is put to use. Here, we outline a framework that facilitates this change and provides a mechanism to characterize, evaluate, and think about a biosystems characteristics in terms of its evolutionary potential rather than merely its phenotype [8, 9].

Conclusion

Human imagination and technological advancements like clothing, tools, and seagoing waka far outpace biological processes, but vitamin D is still directly influenced by our evolutionary past in contemporary society. Some of the evolutionary principles discussed in this book are relatively analogous to numerous techniques used by traditional engineering fields. For instance, using modular components and hierarchical designs, fault tolerance, safety and redundancy features to increase robustness, reusing parts, and including a tolerance for variance in the design. In biological vs. manufactured systems, these concepts are clearly utilised differently and in different places. It is necessary to have a better knowledge of how engineering principles relate to their evolutionary counterparts. Our capacity to design all kinds of complex systems, especially those that evolve, will be improved by a better understanding of how evolution uses these principles. It is equally vital to acknowledge that engineering biology faces challenges other than evolution. Biology, in contrast to many of the substrates we frequently work with, is extremely complicated, even at the basic level (e.g., single cells), with evolving parts that can deform and show complex phase transitions because of the numerous nonlinear interactions present. The ability to properly create living systems will necessitate a holistic approach that takes into account and incorporates these other factors and goes much beyond present working techniques, even if our focus here has just been on evolution [10].

Acknowledgement

None

Conflict of Interest

None

1. Jay IM, Kawaroe M, Effendi H (2018) Lipid and fatty acid composition microalgae Chlorellavulgaris using photo bioreactor and open pond. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 141: 012015.

Google Scholar , Crossref

2. Gouveia L, Oliveira AC (2009) Micro algae as a raw material for biofuels production. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 36: 269-274.

Indexed at, Google Scholar , Crossref

3. Liang Y, Sarkany N, Cui Y (2009) Biomass and lipid productivities of Chlorella vulgaris under autotrophic, heterotrophic and mixotrophic growth conditions. Biotechnol Lett 31: 1043-1049.

Indexed at, Google Scholar , Crossref

4. Widjaja A, Chien CC, Ju YH (2009) Study of increasing lipid production from fresh water microalgae Chlorella vulgaris. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 40: 13-20.

Google Scholar , Crossref

5. Yeh KL, Chang JS, Chen W (2010) Effect of light supply and carbon source on cell growth and cellular composition of a newly isolated microalga Chlorella vulgaris ESP-31. Eng Life Sci 10: 201-208.

Indexed at, Google Scholar , Crossref

6. Ru KIT, Sung YY, Jusoh M, Wahid MEA, Nagappan T (2020) Chlorella vulgaris: a perspective on its potential for combining high biomass with high value bioproducts. Appl Phycol 1: 2-11.

Google Scholar , Crossref

7. Durai G, Rajamohan N, Karthikeyan C, Rajasimman M (2010) Kinetics studies on biological treatment of tannery wastewater using mixed cultures. Int J Chem Biol Eng 3: 105-109.

Indexed at, Google Scholar

8. Ranjithkumar R, Rao PH, Arumugam M (2015) Lipid extraction methods from microalgae: a comprehensive review, front. Energy Res 8.

Indexed at, Google Scholar , Crossref

9. Smith JB, Stephen HS, Oppenheimer M, Yohe GW, Hare W (2009) Assessing dangerous climate change through an update of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “Reasons for Concern”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106: 4133-4137.

Indexed at, Google Scholar , Crossref

10. Shekhar MS, Chand H, Kumar S, Srinivasan K, Ganju A (2010) Climate change studies in the western Himalaya. Ann Glaciol 51: 105-112.

Google Scholar , Crossref