Erik Svensson

My review of two books about the evolution of maladaptation and human imperfection is now out as Early Alert in the journal Evolution @sse_evolution

Enjoy!

https://academic.oup.com/evolut/advance-article/doi/10.1093/evolut/qpag033/8503492

#Evolution #adaptation #maladaptation #naturalselection

Please join me and my colleagues at the Department of Biology, #LundUniversity in #Sweden! We have an open position as Associate Senior Lecturer in Molecular Microbiology. Open for all who defended their PhD within the last 7 years.

Deadline to apply: April 28 2026.

More information and link […]

To Hell with A Priori Metaphysics On the Relationship Between Science and Philosophy

Excellent substack post by philosopher Walter Veit on why a priori metaphysics, armchair philosophy isolated from science and panpsychism is nonsense:

https://open.substack.com/pub/walterveit/p/to-hell-with-a-priori-metaphysics?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=5crvdy

Jeffrey Epstein Couldn’t Stop Emailing People About Eugenics:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2026/02/epstein-emails-eugenics-chomsky-altruism-billionaires/

Eurasian Bullfinch (Pyrrhula pyrrhula)

Dunnock (Prunella modularis)

Redwing (Turdus iliacus)

Robin (Erithacus rubecula)

Some more #naturephotography of mine from the cold winter in January 2016 in #Skåne, southern #Sweden

All bird photos from #Jordbodalen in #Helsingborg

#birdphotography #natgeoyourshot #natgeowild #birdsofmastodon #birding

A Turd in the Punchbowl: Initial Thoughts On Christoph Shuringa’s A Social History of Analytic Philosophy Or: An epigone Crashes the Party - 3:16 […]

The Moral Cowardice of Leading Effective Altruists (and How EA Has Probably Made the World Worse) (3,500 words)

The Moral Cowardice of Leading Effective Altruists (and How EA Has Probably Made the World Worse)

https://www.realtimetechpocalypse.com/p/the-moral-cowardice-of-leading-effective

Some winter bird photography of mine from January 2026 in beautiful Scania, southern Sweden.

#BirdsOfFediverse #birdsofmastodon #birdsofpixelfed #naturephotography #natgeoyourshot #sweden

Tomorrow (Friday January 16), my new photo exhibition on dragonflies and damselflies at Dalby local library will be officially opened at 14.00. Come by for some soft drinks and snacks and ask me any questions you might have about my photos.

The exhibition will […]

[Original post on ecoevo.social]

I spoke with the science writer Carl Zimmer about a recently published study in the journal "Science" of the genomic basis on male throat colour polymorphism in lizards and the implications for the famous "rock-paper-scissor"-game these lizards seem to play.

Here is Carl's article in New York […]

A summary of the research and outreach activities of my research lab the very succesful year of 2025.

Please consider to give our Facebook Page a follow if you are interested in our research:

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1BuaneGUmr/

Happy New Year to all my followers here! Here are some of my nature photography from 2024 and 2025. Check out my Instagram if you want to see more or follow me:

https://www.instagram.com/eriksvenssonsweden?igsh=bWp4OWFvNDBkZ3Zj

Some #naturephotography of mine from the region of #Blekinge in southern #Sweden in the summer of 2024.

See more of my photos here:

https://www.instagram.com/eriksvenssonsweden?igsh=bWp4OWFvNDBkZ3Zj

Adaptive tracking with antagonistic pleiotropy results in seemingly neutral molecular evolution - Nature Ecology & Evolution Population genetics simulations and analysis of experimental datasets in yeast, Drosophila and E. coli show that beneficial mutations are abundant but transient, as they become deleterious after environmental turnover (antagonistic pleiotropy). Consequently, populations continuously adapt to changing environments (adaptive tracking), yet most mutations that reach fixation are neutral.

Adaptive tracking with antagonistic pleiotropy results in seemingly neutral molecular evolution | Nature Ecology & Evolution

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-025-02887-1

European Kingfisher (Alcedo atthis), male. Photographed in Jordbodalen, Helsingborg, southern Sweden in February 2025.

#birdphotography #naturephotography #Sweden

For a Peace From Below in Ukraine Talks over an American-Russian peace plan seek to impose a harsh settlement on Ukraine. Faced with the carve-up of territory, it’s vital to build an international peace movement opposing the logic of imperialist blocs.

https://jacobin.com/2025/12/ukraine-russia-peace-negotiations-antiwar/?fbclid=IwdGRzaAO08utjbGNrA7TtImV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHtKzARgYxVrZvErZbuEtMtZc_92rIobI7iZ1mVRUSovi8pecfngNwuDDrfEJ_aem_Gblqs2VikTcA_r460Ww7hQ&sfnsn=mo

[…]

Senior Lecturer/Associate Professor in Biodiversity The Department of Biology was established in 2010 through the merger of the Departments of Ecology, Cell and Organism Biology, Biological Undergraduate Education, and the Biological Museums. The depar

Come and join me and my colleagues at the Department of Biology, #LundUniversity in #sweden! We have am open position as Senior Lecturer/Associate Professor in Biodiversity.

Apply here no later than February 11 2026:

https://lu.varbi.com/en/what:job/jobID:848749/type:job/where:4/apply:1

Evolution Has No Plan: Why Organisms Don’t Rewrite Their DNA **A quick explanation of some common misunderstandings about evolution.** Scientists should engage with the general public. Translating complex, nuanced research into clear and digestible language matters, especially in the current age of misinformation. However, this task is anything but easy. Much of the public appears to have the attention span of a goldfish with amnesia, happily cherry-picking fragments of information that confirm pre-existing beliefs. Journalists, meanwhile, are often more interested in eye-catching headlines rather than in high-quality research. To make matters worse, they frequently report on topics well outside their expertise, leading to the spread of common misunderstandings and a lack of nuance. These problems were on full display in the recent coverage by several news outlets, such as _The Guardian_ and _BBC_ , which uncritically reported that polar bears are “rewriting their DNA in response to climate change.” Not one of these articles evaluated the claims of the original study, nor did any of the journalists bother to consult independent experts for a second opinion. The latter approach is especially advisable when writing outside your expertise, such as the Belgian journalist at _VRTNWS _who has a background in history (but clearly not in evolutionary biology). Instead, most journalists simply regurgitated the press release. The original study itself has several serious issues, which I discussed in detail on my _Avian Hybrids_ blog. Here, however, I want to focus on something more fundamental: the deeply misleading picture of evolution that was presented to the public. In _The Guardian_ , for example, the lead author is quoted as saying that “polar bears in the warmest part of Greenland are using ‘jumping genes’ to rapidly rewrite their own DNA.” This phrasing strongly suggests that the bears are actively modifying their genomes in response to rising temperatures. That is not how evolution works. **Darwin’s Finches** Let’s start with the basics of evolution by natural selection, the groundbreaking idea of Charles Darwin. The logic is deceptively simple and rests on just three observations. 1. Individuals show **variation** in certain traits. 2. These traits are **heritable** (i.e. offspring look like their parents) 3. Variation in these traits impacts **survival and reproduction rates** This process has been demonstrated beautifully by the long-term work of Peter and Rosemary Grant on Darwin’s finches. In the Medium Ground Finch (_Geospiza fortis_), they quantified both variation and heritability in beak size. The graph below illustrates this clearly: individual variation is obvious from the spread of points, while heritability is evident from the strong correlation between parental bill depth (horizontal axis) and offspring bill depth (vertical axis). By following these finches over multiple years, the Grants also showed that survival and reproduction are not random. It depends on beak morphology. During dry years, birds with larger, more robust beaks have a survival advantage (e.g., the 1977 La Nina-event). During wet years, smaller-beaked individuals fare better (e.g., the 1983 El Niño-event). These shifting survival patterns translate directly into measurable changes in beak size over time. Evolution by natural selection. _Darwin’s Finches illustrate evolution by natural selection. The left graph depicts variation as well as heritability in beak size. The right graph shows how dry (1977) and wet (1983) conditions impact survival rates, and consequently drive changes in beak morphology. Based onGrant & Grant (2002)._ **No Foresight** The key takeaway from the Darwin’s Finches example is simple: these birds have no foresight. They do not decide to grow larger or smaller beaks, nor do they “rewrite” their genes in anticipation of environmental change. Instead, they just display heritable variation in beak size, and the environment merely selects from that variation, favoring one beak morphology over another. As a result, populations become better adapted to local conditions. Crucially, when the local conditions change, the rules will change as well. Traits that were once advantageous may become liabilities, and different variants well then be favored. Over time, this process produces evolutionary change. No planning required. Hence, the claim that “polar bears in the warmest part of Greenland are using ‘jumping genes’ to rapidly rewrite their own DNA” is not just sloppy. It is flat-out wrong. Instead, these bears show variation in gene expression (potentially driven by “jumping genes”) from which natural selection could select the individuals that are best adapted to the local conditions (which might involve increasing temperatures). No foresight. Just heritable variation and natural selection. **Random Mutations** The absence of evolutionary foresight brings me to another persistent misunderstanding: the randomness of mutations. This idea is often misconstrued into the claim that “every mutation is equally likely to occur.” That is simply false. We know perfectly well that some regions of the genome mutate more frequently than others (so-called mutation hotspots). A very nice example concerns a fragile section in the genome of stickleback fish (_Gasterosteus aculeatus_) where enhanced mutation rates facilitate repeated adaptations to new environments. What random actually means in an evolutionary context is quite different: mutations occur without reference to environmental needs. They are not tailored responses to local conditions. Genes for larger beaks do not mutate because large beaks are advantageous. A mutation does not occur because an organism “needs” it. Evolution does not work like a wish list. Individuals do not summon helpful mutations on demand. These insights explain why the claim that polar bears can “rewrite their DNA in response to climate change” is nonsense. Mutations happen regardless of climate change, not because of it. At most, changing conditions (such as higher temperatures) might influence overall mutation rates. But even then, the mutations themselves remain blind to what would be useful. **An Entangled Mess** Taken together, these points expose just how deeply misleading the “DNA-rewriting polar bears” narrative really is. Evolution is not a rapid-response system that detects environmental change and engineers genetic solutions on demand. It is a blind, undirected process driven by heritable variation, random mutations, and natural selection. Also keep in mind that this blog post has still been a simplification. Evolution is messier and more complex than the stripped-down version presented here, involving additional layers of complexity such as genetic drift, gene flow, developmental constraints, and historical contingency. Nature rarely follows neat narratives or headline-friendly metaphors, and evolution certainly does not oblige to our desire for simple stories. Precisely because it is subtle, unintuitive, and endlessly intricate, evolution remains such a fascinating process to study. And as scientists, we should do our best to convey the nuances of this beautiful theory to the general public. Charles Darwin put it best. > There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved. ### Share this: * Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X * Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook * Like Loading... ### _Related_

Evolution Has No Plan: Why Organisms Don’t Rewrite Their DNA | jente ottenburghs
https://jenteottenburghs.wordpress.com/2025/12/18/evolution-has-no-plan-why-organisms-dont-rewrite-their-dna/

I asked Perplexity for information about Swedish-born mathematics professor Mats Tegmark, his views on transhumanism and Effective Altruism (EA) and his links to Elon Musk.

The answer was pretty interesting and alarming […]

Our big collaborative review of theories of balancing selection during the last century is now published in "Biological Reviews" (Open Access, free to download and read for everyone):

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/brv.70103

Applying multilevel selection to understand cancer evolution and progression Cancer is a prime example of multilevel selection. At an organismal level, natural selection has led to the evolution of diverse tumor suppression mechanisms, while at a cellular level, it favors traits that promote cellular proliferation, survival and cancer. This Essay examines how selection operates across levels, highlighting how we might leverage this understanding to improve cancer research, prevention and treatment.

https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3003290

Our new Perspective is now out as Early Alert in the journal Evolution, where we re-visit evolutionary rate-time relationships and discuss the challenge of how to analyze and biologically interpret them:

#Evolution #EvolutionaryBiology #statistics […]

Marxism and the History of Philosophy - Monthly Review

Powerful review and solid defense of the materialist world view:

https://monthlyreview.org/articles/marxism-and-the-history-of-philosophy/?fbclid=IwdGRzaANgGr9jbGNrA2AaeGV4dG4DYWVtAjExAAEe_Xth6HyZGO8OE5IW75PJBsiCm5BmhEig5JaZN9NNEirK5fZa53e_ZYsmEtk_aem_MwHyAPMY67cy6KDOyAzBkA&sfnsn=mo

Nobels fredspris till krigets apostel Världen står verkligen på huvudet. Det blev än en gång tydligt den 10 oktober när den norska Nobelkommittén tillkännagav att María Corina Machado, den yttersta högerns ledare i Venezuela, tilldelas Nobels fredspris 2025. Kommentar Kommitténs ordförande, Jørgen Watne Frydnes, motiverade beslutet med Machados ”outtröttliga arbete för demokratiska rättigheter” och hennes ”kamp för en fredlig övergång från diktatur till demokrati”. Men bakom den vackra retoriken döljer sig en fanatisk högerpolitiker som i åratal uppmanat till militär intervention, ja invasion, av USA i sitt eget land, och som vid upprepade gånger manat till en militärstatskupp mot Nicolás Maduros regering i Caracas. Att ge ett fredspris till en person som kräver krig är inte bara motsägelsefullt – det är djupt provocerande. Priset måste nu snarare ses som en prolog, en symbolisk inbjudan till att invadera Venezuela. När västvärlden på detta sätt belönar en högerpolitiker som förespråkar våld, skickar det ett tydligt budskap: vissa krig betraktas som fredliga, så länge de tjänar USA:s geopolitiska intressen. Nobelkommitténs tal om Machado som en ”enande figur” inom oppositionen är dessutom helt verklighetsfrämmande. Den venezuelanska högern är djupt splittrad: en del, ledd av Henrique Capriles, söker dialog och förhandlingar, medan Machados falang kräver att USA ska störta regeringen med militära medel. Det är också därför hon håller sig gömd, efter flera misslyckade försök att framkalla en militär statskupp. Att Machado nominerades till fredspriset av den republikanske utrikesministern och höken Marco Rubio säger allt om prisets politiska karaktär. Rubio har länge krävt hårdare sanktioner mot Venezuela, stöd till den så kallade ”oppositionen” och öppet pratat om behovet av militär inblandning. Att den norska kommittén belönar just den linjen avslöjar hur långt Nobelpriset har förfallit. Det är ironiskt att Donald Trump inte fick sitt eftertraktade fredspris – trots att han försökte köpa sig till det genom att pressa Netanyahu att skriva under ett pseudo-”fredsavtal” mitt under massakrerna i Gaza. Men kanske behöver han inte längre vara avundsjuk: när en politiker som stöder samma aggressiva politik får priset, har det förlorat varje koppling till fredens idé. Det fanns verkliga kandidater som hade förtjänat erkännandet. Greta Thunberg, som kämpar för mänsklighetens framtid på en döende planet. Francesca Albanese, FN:s särskilda rapportör som modigt avslöjat Israels krigsbrott i Palestina och vägrat tystna. Men istället väljer kommittén att prisa en kvinna som vill se sitt eget land bombas till demokrati. Nobels fredspris har gång på gång väckt debatt – till Henry Kissinger, till Barack Obama, till EU mitt under flyktingkrisen. Men årets beslut överträffar allt i cynism. Genom att ge fredspriset till María Corina Machado har kommittén gjort sig till medspelare i den imperialistiska kampanjen mot Venezuela, där sanktioner, ekonomisk blockad och hot om våld används för att återställa USA:s kontroll över Latinamerikas oljerikaste land. Fredspriset har blivit ett krigspris. När militarism och högerextrem politik belönas i fredens namn har priset förlorat all mening. Det som en gång symboliserade mänsklighetens strävan efter fred och rättvisa har förvandlats till ett redskap för geopolitisk propaganda. Världen är verkligen, som man säger i Latinamerika, _patas arriba_ – upp och ner.

https://internationalen.se/nobels-fredspris-till-krigets-apostel/?fbclid=IwdGRzaANXODZjbGNrA1c34WV4dG4DYWVtAjExAAEeyP2ZVXco1f-2lIl2-9t1GyFkQ_acnts9BANF1WvvWwc86YBVdvMqEAfCWR8_aem_G_8BYw65OFqC2G8SJOyzQg&sfnsn=mo

How Marxists Brought Science to Politics and Politics to Science From Marx and Engels to the present day, socialists have been deeply engaged with the world of science. With the provision of lifesaving vaccines held hostage by corporate profiteering, the story of this relationship is more important than ever.

https://jacobin.com/2022/08/marxism-philosophy-of-science-marx-materialism-ussr

Stoked to see this journal cover of PNAS with one of my photos: a mating pair of Swamp Bluet (Africallagma glaucum) from Harold Porter Botanical Garden in the Western Cape Province of South Africa, photographed in 2011.

#Odonata #odonataoftheworld #damselflies […]

[Original post on ecoevo.social]