Editing Selfish genetic element (section)

=== Current views ===
If the selfish DNA papers marked the beginning of the serious study of selfish genetic elements, the subsequent decades have seen an explosion in theoretical advances and empirical discoveries. [[Leda Cosmides]] and [[John Tooby]] wrote a landmark review about the conflict between maternally inherited cytoplasmic genes and biparentally inherited nuclear genes.<ref name=":20">{{cite journal | vauthors = Cosmides LM, Tooby J | title = Cytoplasmic inheritance and intragenomic conflict | journal = Journal of Theoretical Biology | volume = 89 | issue = 1 | pages = 83–129 | date = March 1981 | pmid = 7278311 | doi = 10.1016/0022-5193(81)90181-8 | bibcode = 1981JThBi..89...83M | s2cid = 36815174 }}</ref> The paper also provided a comprehensive introduction to the logic of genomic conflicts, foreshadowing many themes that would later be subject of much research. Then in 1988 [[John H. Werren]] and colleagues wrote the first major empirical review of the topic.<ref name=":0" /> This paper achieved three things. First, it coined the term selfish genetic element, putting an end to a sometimes confusingly diverse terminology (selfish genes, ultra-selfish genes, selfish DNA, parasitic DNA, genomic outlaws). Second, it formally defined the concept of selfish genetic elements. Finally, it was the first paper to bring together all different kinds of selfish genetic elements known at the time ([[genomic imprinting]], for example, was not covered).<ref name=":0" />

In the late 1980s, most molecular biologists considered selfish genetic elements to be the exception, and that genomes were best thought of as highly integrated networks with a coherent effect on organismal fitness.<ref name=":0" /><ref name=":30" /> In 2006, when [[Austin Burt]] and [[Robert Trivers]] published the first book-length treatment of the topic, the tide was changing.<ref name=":30" /> While their role in evolution long remained controversial, in a review published a century after their first discovery, [[William R. Rice]] concluded that "nothing in genetics makes sense except in the light of genomic conflicts".<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Rice|first=William R. | name-list-style = vanc |date=2013-11-23|title=Nothing in Genetics Makes Sense Except in Light of Genomic Conflict |journal=Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics|volume=44|issue=1|pages=217–237|doi=10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110411-160242|issn=1543-592X}}</ref>