Indiana University

About: Indiana University is a education organization based out in Bloomington, Indiana, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 64480 authors who have published 150058 publications receiving 6392902 citations. The organization is also known as: Indiana University system & indiana.edu.

Does evolutionary theory need a rethink

Abstract: Nobel physicist talks plants with a waiter, then what? p.168 ENERGY Don't assume that renewable energies are problem-free p.168 AGEING Atul Gawande's call to action on end-of-life medical care p.167 HEALTH Lasting legacy of wartime battle against malaria p.166 Does evolutionary theory need a rethink? Researchers are divided over what processes should be considered fundamental. I n October 1881, just six months before he died, Charles Darwin published his final book. The Formation of Vegetable Mould, Through the Actions of Worms 11 sold briskly: Darwin's earlier publications had secured his reputation. He devoted an entire book to these humble creatures in part because they exemplify an interesting feedback process: earthworms are adapted to thrive in an environment that they modify through their own activities. Darwin learned about earthworms from conversations with gardeners and his own simple experiments. He had a genius for distilling penetrating insights about evolutionary processes — often after amassing years of observational and experimental data — and he drew on such disparate topics as agriculture, geology, embryol-ogy and behaviour. Evolutionary thinking ever since has followed Darwin's lead in its emphasis on evidence and in synthesizing information from other fields. A profound shift in evolutionary thinking began C harles Darwin conceived of evolution by natural selection without knowing that genes exist. Now mainstream evolutionary theory has come to focus almost exclusively on genetic inheritance and processes that change gene frequencies. Yet new data pouring out of adjacent fields are starting to undermine this narrow stance. An alternative vision of evolution is beginning to crystallize, in which the processes by which organisms grow and develop are recognized as causes of evolution. Some of us first met to discuss these advances six years ago. In the time since, as members of an interdisciplinary team, we have worked intensively to develop a broader framework, termed the extended evolutionary synthesis 1 (EES), and to flesh out its structure, assumptions and predictions. In essence, this synthesis maintains that important drivers of evolution, ones that cannot be reduced to genes, must be woven into the very fabric of evolutionary theory. We believe that the EES will shed new light on how POINT Yes, urgently Without an extended evolutionary framework, the theory neglects key processes, say Kevin Laland and colleagues.

Does Stock Liquidity Enhance or Impede Firm Innovation

Abstract: We aim to tackle the longstanding debate on whether stock liquidity enhances or impedes firm innovation This topic is of interest because innovation is crucial for firm- and national-level competitiveness and stock liquidity can be altered by financial market regulations Using a difference-in-differences approach that relies on the exogenous variation in liquidity generated by regulatory changes, we find that an increase in liquidity causes a reduction in future innovation We identify two possible mechanisms through which liquidity impedes innovation: increased exposure to hostile takeovers and higher presence of institutional investors who do not actively gather information or monitor