Jan Klein (January 18, 1936 – May 7, 2023) was a Czech–American immunologist.

Professional life
Jan Klein was a Czech-American immunologist, best known for his work on the major histocompatibility complex (MHC). He was born in 1936 in Stemplovec, Opava, Czech Republic. He graduated from the Charles University at Prague, in 1955, and received his M.S. (magna cum laude) in botany from the same school in 1958. He was a teacher at the Neruda High School in Prague from 1958 to 1961. He received his Ph.D. in genetics from the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences in 1965, and moved to Stanford University as a postdoctoral fellow the same year. He became assistant professor in 1969, and associate professor in 1973 at the University of Michigan. He assumed the position of professor at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical School in 1975. From 1977 to his retirement in 2004, he was the director of the Max-Planck-Institut für Biologie at Tübingen, Germany. From 2004 to his passing  in 2023,  he was a Frances R. and Helen M. Pentz Visiting Professor of Science and adjunct professor of biology at the Pennsylvania State University.

Research interests
Klein's scientific output encompasses 600 publications in scientific journals and a dozen of books, which he either authored or edited. It spans three major disciplines: genetics, immunology, and evolutionary biology, as well as one interface discipline: immunogenetics. His major research focus was on the major histocompatibility complex, (MHC or Mhc), which comprises series of genes, which play a critical part in the initiation of the adaptive immune response (AIS), exemplified by the production of antibodies specific for different pathogens.

Major accomplishments
Redefinition of Immunology
In his textbooks and other writings, Klein introduced a new concept of immunology, in which he conceived the discipline as a branch of biological sciences, rather than as a narrow province of medical studies, as it had been represented traditionally. He defined immunology as the science of self-nonself discrimination, concerned not just with the human species and its animal models (mouse, rabbit, and others), but with all organisms; and not just with issues of human health, but with normal physiological functions, executed with specialized body systems. He was the first to include in an immunology textbook sections emphasizing the importance of the so-called non-adaptive immune system (NAIS; he preferred to call it non-anticipatory). He also gave immunology a logical internal structure. Instead of organizing his textbooks into sections such as immunochemistry, immunobiology, immunogenetics, immunopathology, and so on, as was then customary (i.e., according to immunology’s interfaces with other disciplines and leaving very little for immunology itself), he presented it as a self-contained science. He organized it as a science operating with specialized organs, cells, genes, molecules, mechanisms, phenotypes, and functions.

Redefinition of Immunogenetics
In his experimental work, his 25 years as a director of the Immunogenetics Division of the Max Planck Institute of Biology, and nearly the same period of time at the helm of the journal Immunogenetics, Klein strived to redefine the immunogenetics discipline. Immunogenetics emerged in the 1930s as the study of genes controlling antigens (such as those of the various blood group systems) detected by antibodies. This was a very artificial delineation of a discipline, based essentially on a method, rather than on an internal content. In Klein's conception, immunogenetics was to deal with what immunology and genetics have in common—a set of genes that control and effect immune responses of any kind.

Discovery of Class II Genes and the Concept of Mhc
In the adaptive immune system, the three preeminent sets of genes are those that code for the Mhc, T-cell receptor (Tcr), and B-cell receptor (Bcr, the antibodies) proteins. Klein contributed to the study of all three systems, but his primary interest was in the Mhc system. He developed the modern concept of the Mhc as consisting of two principal kinds of gene, for which he coined the designations class I and class II genes. The class I genes were discovered in 1936 (the year Jan Klein was born) as coding for blood group (red blood cell) antigens, which, however, were also responsible for the rejection of incompatible grafts. Klein, with his coworker Vera Hauptfeld and his wife Dagmar Klein, were the first to describe the product of the class II genes and identify them as the molecules that control level of antibodies synthesized in response to foreign antigens. Earlier, Hugh O. McDevitt and his coworkers mapped an Immune response-1 (Ir-1) locus influencing the level of antibody production against the synthetic polypeptide (T,G)-L—A into the Mhc. Klein and his coworkers, finding their locus inseparable from the postulated Ir-1 locus, concluded that the class II antigens they demonstrated on the surfaces of lymphocytes were the product of the Ir-1 locus. Later studies confirmed this interpretation. Genetic mapping of the loci controlling the class I and class II antigens of the mouse showed them to be part of a cluster, which Klein mapped to the chromosome 17 and for which he championed the name major histocompatibility locus, Mhc. The name referred to the fact that the genes were part of a set that controlled tissue compatibility and in this set one cluster had the strongest (major) effect. George D. Snell named the tissue compatibility genes histocompatibility 1, 2, 3, etc., in the order of discovery, and since the H2 genes happened to be strongest of the set, they became the first Mhc known. All other histocompatibility genes came to be called minor.
Initially, genetic mapping of the mouse class I antigens suggested the existence of multiple class I loci in the H2 complex. Soon, however, inconsistencies in the assignment of certain antigens to loci signaled that something was amiss with the H2 maps, as they were then drawn. Klein and Donald C. Shreffler solved the problem by demonstrating that a given antigen could be present on molecules controlled by different loci. Taking this finding into account, they were able to reduce the number of the class I loci to two, H2K and H2D. This "two-locus model" played a n important part in subsequent interpretations of the Mhc. The model was also consistent with the results of earlier Klein's PhD work, in which he discovered that immune selection for a loss of certain H2 antigens on somatic cells was accompanied by the loss of some but not other unselected antigens. In this respect, the antigens fell into two groups as if carried by two different molecules. The discovery of the class II genes had been fitted into the model by the demonstration that they mapped between the H2K and the H2D. Shreffler also demonstrated the existence of another locus mapping between the two class I loci. It coded for what he called the "serum serological" or Ss protein, present in a soluble form in the blood fluid phase, in contrast to the class I and class II antigens, which were expressed on cell surfaces.  At that stage, the H2 complex could be divided into four regions: class I (H2K)...Class II (Ir-1)...Ss...Class I (H2D).
These developments alerted immunologists on the one hand and transplantation biologists on the other of the Mhc’s potential importance for their respective disciplines. The consequence was a proliferation of reports describing association of a variety of phenomena with the complex. The associations were demonstrated by testing the responses of congenic strains differing at the H2 complex and mapping the genes controlling the responses within the H2 complex with the help of strains carrying H2 haplotypes derived by intra-H2 recombinations. These strains were developed by George D. Snell, Jack H. Stimpfling, Donald C. Shreffler, and Jan Klein. The phenomena included control of antibody response to a variety of antigens, both natural and synthetic; suppression of immune response by special suppressor cells or soluble factors; proliferation of lymphocytes in an in vitro culture challenged with H2-incompatible stimulating cell (the so-called mixed lymphocyte reaction, MLR); killing of H2-icompatible target cells by sensitized lymphocytes (cell-mediated lymphocytotoxicity, CML); response of transplanted immune cell against the tissues of the host (graft versus host reaction, GVHR); rejection of H2-incompatible grafts (skin, heart, bone marrow, etc.) by the recipients; and others. All these phenomena appeared to be controlled by different loci within the Mhc. As a result, the H2 complex appeared to expand by the addition of new loci (regions). Klein's group, however, challenged this interpretation and in a series of carefully controlled studies demonstrated that the new loci were in reality mirages generated by various forms of interaction involving the established class I and class II loci. In this manner, Klein contracted the H2 complex back to the version established by the serological methods, and propounded the view that the various responses (MLR, CML, etc.) were controlled by the class I and class II loci, rather than by separate loci. Later, other loci were again mapped within the H2 complex and these were no phantoms. They were real but, as Klein argued, they were unrelated to the class I and class II loci and ended up in the region by chance. The general opinion was, however, that they represented the class III region of the Mhc, that they were functionally related to the Mhc by being involved in immune response, and that the complex functioned as an immune supergene. The first of these class III loci was the Ss locus, which was later identified as coding for complement component 4. The C4 protein was indeed involved in immunity by being one in a series of protein molecules that attach to a cell-bound antibody to puncture a hole in it and thus kill it. But nobody could come up with a reason why it had to be linked to the class I or class II genes to function properly. Similar arguments could be applied to the other class III genes. Later, Klein's view received a strong support when his group discovered that in the fishes, which comprise more than half of jawed vertebrates, not even the class I and class II genes were in a single cluster and the class III genes were scattered all over the genome. Ultimately, the modern concept prevailed against the tendencies to make the Mhc unnecessarily nonparsimonious.

Nature of the Mhc-controlled Immune Response
The control of antibody response by the Mhc raised many question. The one on the top of immunologists’ agenda was: Why were some individuals carrying a certain H2 haplotype  high responders to a given antigen, while others, carrying certain other haplotype were low responders or nonresponders? The phenomenon could be reproduced in vitro by the exposure to the antigen. Lymphocytes isolated from the high responder proliferated to a much higher degree than those isolated from a low responder individual. The assay required, in addition to the thymus-derived (T) lymphocytes, also "macrophages" or antigen-presenting cells (APCs) from the same individual. In this set-up the question reduced itself to: Are the T lymphocytes or the APCs responsible for the difference in responsiveness? Many immunologists were inclined to put the blame on the APCs, but the Klein-Nagy group, in a series of elegant experiments, falsified this hypothesis and explained why T lymphocytes bearing different Mhc haplotypes might differ in their response to specific antigens. The receptors of the T lymphocytes recognize an antigen in association with their own Mhc molecules. The different specificities of the Tcrs born by the individual T cells are generated by a special mechanism during the lymphocyte development from precursor cells in the thymus. The generation is entirely random, so that receptors arise against all possible antigens, including those borne by the individual in which the differentiation takes place (the self-molecules). The cells with receptors for self-molecules must be eliminated to prevent an immune reaction against the individual's own components. The eliminated Tcrs might, however, by chance have had the capability of recognizing certain foreign antigens (nonself) in association with the nonresponder’ own
Mhc molecules. The T-cell repertoire thus has  "blind spots", making an individual nonresponsive not only to self but also against certain foreign antigens.

Mhc Polymorphism, Variation in Chromosome Numbers, and t-haplotypes
Typing of inbred strains suggested that the Mhc might manifest unusually high variability (polymorphism). Inbred strains were, however, not suited for determining polymorphism, because assessing it required measuring gene frequencies in populations. There were all sorts of problems associated with such an effort, most of which could, however, be alleviated by transferring a sample of H2 haplotypes from wild mice onto inbred (C57BL/10 or B10) background and thus producing a set of congenic B10.W lines. These lines proved to be essential for the complete characterization of the new haplotypes; for the identification of natural intra-H2 recombinants; and for their use as a tool for mapping H2-associated traits. Using a variety of methods, Klein and his colleagues were able to characterize H2 polymorphism in populations of wild mice from different parts of the world. The studies revealed that the polymorphism was indeed staggering, both in the number of alleles and haplotypes (a haplotype being a particular combination of alleles borne by  a particular chromosomal segment) that occurred in appreciable frequencies in the populations. Exceptions from the high polymorphism were found only in certain island populations and in populations that have passed recently through a bottleneck phase. The H2 polymorphism, in combination with other markers, could then be used to characterize a population. H2- typing of the global wild mice population revealed it to be fragmented into a large number of small subpopulations (demes), which differed in the presence and frequencies of alleles at the individual loci. Skin grafting and other methods indicated inbreeding within the demes, but sharing of certain alleles between the demes suggested a continuous gene flow between demes.
These findings were supported by analyses of other markers, primarily chromosomal polymorphism and t-haplotypes. The karyotype of the house mouse normally consists of 40 telocentric chromosomes, but in certain regions in Europe, mice with karyotypes containing fewer than 40 chromosomes can be found. The reduction in chromosome number is due to centric fusion (Robertsonian translocation) of two telocentrics into a single metacentric. Klein's group found populations with metacentric chromosomes in different regions of Europe, but concentrated its effort on the system of metacentrics in southern Germany. An in-depth study of these populations revealed subdivision into subpopulations, which correlated with that established by the studies of H2 polymorphism.
A t-haplotype is a designation for a chromosomal region adjacent to or encompassing the H2 complex. Three features characterize the t region: suppression of recombination over the entire length of a complete t-haplotype; segregation distortion (t/+ males transmit the t-chromosome into more than 90 percent of their progeny); and frequent presence of homozygous lethal genes. Klein group's combined t and H2 studies on wild mice from all over the world led to the identification and characterization of a number of new t-haplotypes. Their characterization demonstrated that all the haplotypes were derived from a single ancestral haplotype; that the ancestral haplotype originated in the western European Mus domesticus; that it arose recently; and that from M. domesticus a single t-haplotype introgressed into the eastern European M. musculus, where it then underwent limited diversification.

Trans-species Polymorphism
Dictionaries define genetic polymorphism as the presence, in appreciable frequencies, of two or more alleles at a locus in a species. Hence H2 polymorphism was expected to have arisen by an unusually high mutation (evolutionary) rate in the house mouse after its divergence from its nearest relative. There was, however, no indication that this was the case. On the contrary, Klein and his co-workers found, by the methods then available, indistinguishable alleles in the two European house mouse species, Mus domesticus and M. musculus, which diverged from each other some 1–2 million years  (my) ago. Similarly, in M. domesticus populations, whose divergence times could be dated, they found no new variants. Klein's group could also not find any new Mhc (HLA) variants in isolated human populations such as those of the South American Indians and the indigenous populations of Siberia. These and other observations led Klein to the formulation of the trans-species polymorphism (TSP) hypothesis positing that the divergence of similar Mhc alleles predates the divergence of the species in which they occur. The original detection of trans-species polymorphism relied on serological (antibody-based) identification of antigenic molecules. Later, however, the identity of alleles in different species could be confirmed by peptide-mapping analysis of the antigenic proteins. Ultimately, DNA-sequencing not only confirmed the results obtained with the earlier methods, but also introduced a new dimension into the TSP studies. The tests revealed that closely related species such as M. domesticus and M. musculus, the many haplochromine fish species in East African lakes and rivers, or Darwin's finches on the Galapagos Islands, shared many alleles at not only the Mhc, but also at some of the non-Mhc loci. In more distantly related species, such as human and chimpanzee or the house mouse and the Norwegian rat, sharing of identical alleles could no longer be demonstrated, but shared related alleles were clearly in evidence. This finding led to the concept of allelic lineages, in which members of a given lineage in one species were more similar to members of the same lineage in another species than they were to other alleles in either of the two species, TSP of Mhc and other loci has since been documented in many species and found applications to a variety of issues in evolutionary biology.

Applications of the TSP Concept in Evolutionary Biology
The essence of the TSP concept is that a certain number of alleles at a locus must pass through the speciation phase from the ancestral to the descendant species to assure the retention of the ancestral polymorphism in the new species. If this number is known, the size of the founding population of the emerging species can be estimated. The TSP thus provides a window into the otherwise poorly accessible phase of evolution. Klein's group used the TSP concept to estimate the founding population sizes of several species. For the human species, the size estimated from the HLA polymorphism was 10,000 breeding individuals. Similarly large founding populations had to be postulated for the two lineages from which most of the hundreds of species inhabiting Lake Victoria in East Africa had diverged. And even for Darwin's finches, widely believed to have arisen from a single pair of founders, Vincek and his colleagues came to the conclusion that the founding flock was at least 30 heads strong.
These studies became Klein's bridge to evolutionary biology. He crossed this bridge in a series of investigations into the nature of the speciation process in Darwin's finches and in haplochromine fishes of East Africa. With Akie Sato and collaborators, they provided molecular evidence that the 14 extant species of Darwin's finches on the Galapagos Islands and the one species on the Cocos Island were all derived from a single ancestral species that arrived on the islands some 5 my ago. They identified the ancestral species as being related to Tiaris obscura, a species now inhabiting Ecuador and other parts of the South American continent. Using DNA markers they were able to determine phylogenetic relationships among the extant Darwin's finches, except for the group of Ground finches. In the latter, the morphologically poorly distinguishable species were indistinguishable at the molecular level. This result could mean either that the species diverged quite recently and that the polymorphisms of their genomes have not have had enough time to sort themselves out among the species, or that the species continue exchanging genes.
Haplochromines are one of two main groups of cichlid fishes in East Africa; the other group being the tilapiine fishes. Klein and his associates studied both groups and using a variety of molecular markers contributed to the resolution of their phylogenetic relationships. They then focused on the haplochromines of both the lakes, large and small, and the rivers. The studies revealed degree of relatedness between the various groups that correlated roughly with their geographical distribution. The main focus of Klein's group became Lake Victoria, however. The lake is the youngest of all the large lakes in East Africa, its latest refill after a desiccation dated to 14,600 years ago. The lake is inhabited with more 200 haplochromine species distinguishable morphologically and behaviorally. Contrary to earlier claims, Klein's group demonstrated that the species are not monophyletic and are by no means pauperized in their genetic polymorphism. They fall into at least two lineages, which separated from each other 41,500 years ago, presumably outside of the lake. The lineages diverged from haplochromines inhabiting smaller lakes west of Lake Victoria more than 80,000 years ago. As in the case of the Ground finches of the Galapagos Islands, the haplochromine species of Lake Victoria are not distinguishable by any molecular markers Klein's group used in their studies. All population genetics methods used to compute genetic distances showed no significant difference between species and between populations of the same species. In this case, however, Klein's group was able to rule out insufficient separation time as the explanation of the data and to argue that the explanation lies in the continuation of a gene flow between the incipient species. They argue further that speciation is a protracted affair during which the arising species diverge in a few genes responsible for phenotypic differences, but continue exchanging genes until the emergence of a reproductive barrier stops the process. They argue furthermore that because of this phenomenon, many phylogenies of so-called adaptive radiations will remain unresolved. One such case is the radiation that gave rise to the tetrapods in the evolution of jawed vertebrates. In this case, Klein's group has demonstrated that increasing the number of genes in the input database does not improve the resolution power of the output phylogenetic trees.

Evolution of the Mhc
Three critical assumptions underlie the study of Mhc evolution: First, the Mhc is absent in all non-vertebrates. Second, jawless vertebrates (Agnatha) are monophyletic and are a sister group of jawed vertebrates (Gnathostoma). And third, jawless vertebrates lack the Mhc, which is present in all the jawed vertebrates. Klein's group contributed significantly to the current general acceptance of these suppositions. The absence of the Mhc in non-vertebrates became apparent when scrutiny of non-vertebrate genomes failed to identify homologs of Mhc genes. Klein's group provided strong support for agnathan monophyly by cloning, sequencing, and analyzing long DNA stretches of the representative agnathan and gnathostome species. And they isolated, in collaboration with Max Cooper's group, lymphocyte-like cells, cloned, sequenced, and analyzed genes expressed in these cells, and found no evidence for expressed Mhc gene homologs. They did find, however, evidence for gradual evolution of the adaptive immune system. They could demonstrate the presence in jawless vertebrates of several auxiliary components and pathways, which the AIS co-opted when the three central receptors (Mhc, Tcr, and Bcr) emerged in the jawed vertebrates. They also contributed evidence for the omnipresence of Mhc genes in jawed vertebrates by identifying such genes in a wide range of species from bony fishes [zebrafish (Danio rerio), cichlid Aulonocara hansbaenschi, tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus), carp (Cyprinus carpio), guppy (Poecilia reticulata), threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus), swordtail (Xiphophorus)]; through coelacanth (Latimeria chalumnae), African lungfish (Protopterus aethiopicus); birds [Bengalese finch (Lonchura striata), Darwin's finches and their South American relatives]; to metatherian mammals [red-necked wallaby (Macropus rufogriseus) and eutherian mammal [rodents such as the mole rat (Spalax ehrenbergi)] and a variety of primates including prosimians, New World monkeys (NWM, Platyrrhini), Old World monkeys (OWM, Catarrhini) and apes]. In several of these species they worked out also the organization of the Mhcs, most notably in the zebrafish.
As for the evolution of the Mhc genes themselves, Klein's group contributed significantly to the description of its general outline. In collaboration with Yoko Satta and Naoyuki Takahata, they developed a method for estimating the evolutionary rates of the Mhc genes and demonstrated that the rate was close to the average rate of most non-Mhc genes, and they provided evidence that the Mhc genes are subject to balancing selection. They also provided evidence that the selection leads to the independent, repeated emergence of similar or identical short sequence motifs by convergent evolution. Klein himself has long championed the view that this mechanism and mechanisms similar to it, rather than the generally favored "gene conversion", explained the origin of the motifs.
Klein's group demonstrated that during its evolution, the Mhc undergoes repeated rounds of expansion and contraction by gene duplications and deletions –in Klein's terminology, an accordion mode of evolution. Thus, for example, they showed that in each of the three major primate lineages – the prosimians, the NWM and the OWM – evolution of some of the class II gene families started anew after a contraction to a single ancestral gene. And on the example of two "class III" genes, C4 and CYP21, they illustrated a mechanism by which the accordion might be expanding and contracting. The C4 gene, as already stated, codes for a component of the complement system; the CYP21gene codes for a key enzyme in the synthesis of glucocorticoid and mineralcorticoid hormones. The two genes are thus unrelated to each other and to the class I and class II genes, but they are accidentally hooked together into a module, which has been found to duplicate or triplicate as a unit during primate evolution. The hook-up seems to have arisen, when an identical short sequence motif arose by chance at both flanks of the initial C4-CYP21 doublet. Since then, an occasional misalignment of the opposite flanks has led to an unequal crossing-over and so to duplications or deletion of the module.

Honors and awards
2018  Neuron Prize for Lifelong Contribution to Science – Biology
2004	Gregor Johann Mendel Medal, Moravian Museum, Brno
1994	Jan Evangelista Purkyne Medal
1990	Glaxo Prize for Medical Writing
1986	James W. Mclaughlin Medal
1986	6th J.F. Heremans Memorial Lecture, Institute of Cellular and Molecular Pathology
1985-1990	Member, Institute Scientific Council, ICP
1985	5th Maude L. Menten Lecturer, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine
1985	Culpepper Lecturer, University of North Carolina
1985	Francois 1er Fonde le College de France Medal
1981	Rabbi Shai Shacknai Memorial Prize in Immunology and Cancer Research, Hebrew University of Jerusalem
1979	Elisabeth Goldschmid Memorial Lecture,	Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Memberships
1997–1998, Immunogenetics honorary editor
1991, International Mammalian Genome Society founding member
1990–1993, Mammalian Genome, editor-in-chief
1989–Present, Folia Biologica, member, editorial board
1989–1991, EMBO Journal, member, editorial board
1988–1995, Cambridge Studies in Evolutionary Biology, member, editorial board
1987–1995, Molecular Biology and Evolution, associate editor
1987, CRC Critical Reviews in Immunology, member, editorial board
1987, National Institutes of Health, member, National Advisory Council of Immunology
1985–1990, Mouse Newsletter, member, editorial board
1984–1991, International Reviews of Immunology, member, editorial board
1984–1990, Bioscience Research Reports, Immunology Series, member, editorial board
1983–1997, EOS, Journal of Immunology and Immunopharmacology, member, editorial board
1983–1996, Immunological Reviews, member, editorial board
1983–1987, Cell, member, editorial board
1982–Present, Scandinavian Journal of Immunology, member, editorial board
1981–1990, Journal of Craniofacial Genetics and Developmental Biology, member, editorial board
1981–1987, Transplantation Society, councilor
1977–1991, European Journal of Immunology, member, editorial board
1977–1983, Developmental and Comparative Immunology, member, editorial board
1977–1980, Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology, member, editorial board
1974–1997, Immunogenetics, editor-in-chief
1974–1978, National Institutes of Health, member, Immunology Study Section
1974–1976, Transplantation, member, editorial board
1974–1975, Journal of Immunology, member, editorial board
1982,  European Molecular Biology Organization, member
American Association of Immunologists, honorary member
Scandinavian Society of Immunology, honorary member
French Society of Immunology, honorary member
American Association for Advancement of Science, Fellow Member
American Association for the Advancement of Science, Fellow
American Association of Immunologists, honorary member
Societas Scientarum Bohemica, honorary member

Books
Klein, J. and Klein, N. Solitude of a Humble Genius - Gregor Johann Mendel: Volume 1, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013
Klein, J. and Takahata, N. Where Do We Come From? Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg 2002
Klein, J. and Horejsi, V. Immunology. 2nd edn. Blackwell Science, Oxford 1997.
Blancher, A., Klein, J., and Socha, W.W. (eds.). Molecular Biology and Evolution of Blood Group and MHC antigens in Primates. Springer-Verlag, Berlin 1997.
Klein, J. and Klein, D. (eds.) Molecular Biology of the Major Histocompatibility Complex. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg 1991
Klein, J. Immunology. Blackwell, Oxford 1990.
Klein, J. Natural History of the Major Histocompatibility Complex. Wiley, New York 1986.
Klein, J. Immunology. The Science of Self-Nonself Discrimination. Wiley, New York 1982.
Klein, J. Biology of the Mouse Histocompatibility-2 Complex. Principles of Immunogenetics Applied to a Single System. Springer-Verlag, New York 1975.
Klein, J., Vojtíšková, M., and Zelený, V. (eds.) Genetic Variations in Somatic Cells. Academia, Praha 1966.
Klein, J. Molekulární základy dedicnosti (Molecular Basis of Heredity). Orbis, Praha 1964 (in Czech).
Klein, J. The Use of Tissue Incompatibility in the Genetics of the Somatic Cell. Academia, Praha 1966 (in Czech).

References
External links
Jan Klein telling his life story at Web of Stories
Jan Klein at timms
Jan Klein Laureate Neuron Prize for Lifelong Contribution to Science 2018 – Biology


Macrosatellites are the largest of the tandem DNA repeats. Each macrosatellite repeat typically is several kilobases in length, and the entire repeat array often spans hundreds of kilobases. Reduced number of repeats on chromosome 4 (D4Z4 repeats) causes euchromatization of local DNA and is the predominant cause of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD). Other macrosatellites are RS447, NBL2 and DXZ4, although RS447 is also commonly referred to as a "megasatellite."

See also
Microsatellite
Minisatellite
Satellite DNA

== References ==


Magnetogenetics is a medical research technique whereby magnetic fields are used to affect cell function.

History
The development of genetic technologies that can modulate cellular processes has greatly contributed to biological research. A representative example is the development of optogenetics, which is a neuromodulation tool kit that involves light-sensitive proteins such as opsins. This progress provided the grounds for a breakthrough in linking the causal relationship between neuronal activity and behavioral outcome.
The foremost strength of the genetic toolkits used in neuromodulation is that it can provide either spatially or temporally, or both, precise modulation of the brain nervous system. To date, several technologies are adapted with genetics (e.g. optogenetics, chemogenetics, etc.), and each technology has strengths and limits. For example, optogenetics has advantages in that it can provide temporally and spatially precise manipulation of neurons. On the other hand, it involves light stimulation, which cannot penetrate tissues effectively and requires implanted optical devices, limiting its applications for in vivo live animal studies
Techniques that rely on the magnetic control of cellular process are relatively new. This technique may provide an approach that does not require implantation of invasive electrodes or optical devices. This method will allow penetration in to the deeper region of the brain, and may have lower response latency. In 1980, Young and colleagues have shown that magnetic fields with magnitudes in millitesla range are able to penetrate into the brain without attenuation of the signal or side effects because of the negligible magnetic susceptibility and low conductivity of biological tissue. Early attempts to manipulate electrical signaling within brain using magnetic fields was performed by Baker et al., who later developed devices for transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in 1985.
To apply magnetogenetics in biological and neuroscientific research, fusing TRPV class receptors with a paramagnetic protein (typically ferritin) was suggested. These paramagnetic proteins, which typically contain iron or have iron-containing cofactors, are then magnetically stimulated. How this technique can modulate neuronal activity remains unclear but it is thought that the ion channels are activated and opened either by mechanical force exerted by the paramagnetic proteins, or by heating of these via magnetic stimulation. However, availability of such paramagnetic proteins as a transducer for magnetic field to mechanical or temperature stimuli is controversial.
On the other hand, nanoparticles have been suggested as possible candidates that can function as the transducer of magnetic field to the stimulus cue. Based on this concept, next generation of magnetogenetics technique is being developed. In 2010, Arnd Pralle and colleges showed that the first in vivo magneto-thermal stimulation of heat sensitive ion channel TRPV1 that employs magnetic nanoparticles as a transducer in C. elegans. In 2012, Seung Chan Kim showed gene expression profile change of total human genome approximately 30,000 genes using 0.2T static magnetic fields. In 2015, Polina Anikeeva's research group demonstrated that similar concept can enhance the neuronal signals in mammalian brain. In 2021, Jinwoo Cheon's research group has successfully developed the magneto-mechanical genetics which uses magnetic stimulation derived mechanical force in mammalian. In this study, magnetic torque by rotating magnetic field was employed to activate the mechanosensitive cation channel Piezo1. Results of this study show that remote, in vivo manipulation of behavior of mice can be done using magnetogenetics.

Issues
Physical limitation of the ferritin
One of the main issues in magnetogenetics is related the physical properties of the ferritin. The ferritin is composed of 24 subunits of protein complex and a small iron oxide core. The core of the ferritin is in the form of ferric hydroxide which has antiferromagnetic properties. Some researchers have reported that ferritin has remnant magnetization due to their intrinsic defect and impurities. However, even with optimistic calculations, the magnetic interaction energy for heat or force generation is several orders below than thermal fluctuation energy. Recently, other researchers hypothesized that there are other possible mechanisms for activate the ion channels, but these studies remain inconclusive.

See also
Deep brain stimulation
Magnetic nanoparticles
Regenerative medicine
Tissue engineering
Transcranial magnetic stimulation

== References ==


Intragenomic conflict refers to the evolutionary phenomenon where genes have phenotypic effects that promote their own transmission in detriment of the transmission of other genes that reside in the same genome. The selfish gene theory postulates that natural selection will increase the frequency of those genes whose phenotypic effects cause their transmission to new organisms, and most genes achieve this by cooperating with other genes in the same genome to build an organism capable of reproducing and/or helping kin to reproduce. The assumption of the prevalence of intragenomic cooperation underlies the organism-centered concept of inclusive fitness. However, conflict among genes in the same genome may arise both in events related to reproduction (a selfish gene may "cheat" and increase its own presence in gametes or offspring above the expected according to fair Mendelian segregation and fair gametogenesis) and altruism (genes in the same genome may disagree on how to value other organisms in the context of helping kin because coefficients of relatedness diverge between genes in the same genome).

Nuclear genes
Autosomic genes usually have the same mode of transmission in sexually reproducing species due to the fairness of Mendelian segregation, but conflicts among alleles of autosomic genes may arise when an allele cheats during gametogenesis (segregation distortion) or eliminates embryos that don't contain it (lethal maternal effects). An allele may also directly convert its rival allele into a copy of itself (homing endonucleases). Finally, mobile genetic elements completely bypass Mendelian segregation, being able to insert new copies of themselves into new positions in the genome (transposons).

Segregation distortion
In principle, the two parental alleles have equal probabilities of being present in the mature gamete. However, there are several mechanisms that lead to an unequal transmission of parental alleles from parents to offspring. One example is a gene drive complex, called a segregation distorter, that "cheats" during meiosis or gametogenesis and thus is present in more than half of the functional gametes. The most studied examples are sd in Drosophila melanogaster (fruit fly), t haplotype in Mus musculus (mouse) and sk in Neurospora spp. (fungus). Possible examples have also been reported in humans.
Segregation distorters that are present in sexual chromosomes (as is the case with the X chromosome in several Drosophila species) are denominated sex-ratio distorters, as they induce a sex-ratio bias in the offspring of the carrier individual.

Killer and target
The simplest model of meiotic drive involves two tightly linked loci: a Killer locus and a Target locus. The segregation distorter set is composed by the allele Killer (in the Killer locus) and the allele Resistant (in the Target locus), while its rival set is composed by the alleles Non-killer and Non-resistant. So, the segregation distorter set produces a toxin to which it is itself resistant, while its rival is not. Thus, it kills those gametes containing the rival set and increases in frequency. The tight linkage between these loci is crucial, so these genes usually lie on low-recombination regions of the genome.

True meiotic drive
Other systems do not involve gamete destruction, but rather use the asymmetry of meiosis in females: the driving allele ends up in the oocyte instead of in the polar bodies with a probability greater than one half. This is termed true meiotic drive, as it does not rely on a post-meiotic mechanism. The best-studied examples include the neocentromeres (knobs) of maize, as well as several chromosomal rearrangements in mammals. The general molecular evolution of centromeres is likely to involve such mechanisms.

Lethal maternal effects
The Medea gene causes the death of progeny from a heterozygous mother that do not inherit it. It occurs in the flour beetle (Tribolium castaneum). Maternal-effect selfish genes have been successfully synthesized in the lab.

Transposons
Transposons are autonomous replicating genes that encode the ability to move to new positions in the genome and therefore accumulate in the genomes. They replicate themselves in spite of being detrimental to the rest of the genome.
They are often called 'jumping genes' or parasitic DNA and were discovered by Barbara McClintock in 1944.

Homing endonuclease genes
Homing endonuclease genes (HEG) convert their rival allele into a copy of themselves, and are thus inherited by nearly all meiotic daughter cells of a heterozygote cell. They achieve this by encoding an endonuclease which breaks the rival allele. This break is repaired by using the sequence of the HEG as template.HEGs encode sequence-specific endonucleases. The recognition sequence (RS) is 15–30 bp long and usually occurs once in the genome. HEGs are located in the middle of their own recognition sequences.
Most HEGs are encoded by self-splicing introns (group I & II) and inteins. Inteins are internal protein fragments produced from protein splicing and usually contain endonuclease and splicing activities.
The allele without the HEGs are cleaved by the homing endonuclease and the double-strand break are repaired by homologous recombination (gene conversion) using the allele containing HEGs as template. Both chromosomes will contain the HEGs after repair.

B-chromosome
B-chromosomes are nonessential chromosomes; not homologous with any member of the normal (A) chromosome set; morphologically and structurally different from the A's; and they are transmitted at higher-than-expected frequencies, leading to their accumulation in progeny. In some cases, there is strong evidence to support the contention that they are simply selfish and that they exist as parasitic chromosomes. They are found in all major taxonomic groupings of both plants and animals.

Cytoplasmic genes
Since nuclear and cytoplasmic genes usually have different modes of transmission, intragenomic conflicts between them may arise. Mitochondria and chloroplasts are two examples of sets of cytoplasmic genes that commonly have exclusive maternal inheritance, similar to endosymbiont parasites in arthropods, like Wolbachia.

Males as dead-ends to cytoplasmic genes
Anisogamy generally produces zygotes that inherit cytoplasmic elements exclusively from the female gamete. Thus, males represent dead-ends to these genes. Because of this fact, cytoplasmic genes have evolved a number of mechanisms to increase the production of female descendants and eliminate offspring not containing them.

Feminization
Male organisms are converted into females by cytoplasmic inherited protists (Microsporidia) or bacteria (Wolbachia), regardless of nuclear sex-determining factors. This occurs in amphipod and isopod Crustacea and Lepidoptera.

Male-killing
Male embryos (in the case of cytoplasmic inherited bacteria) or male larvae (in the case of Microsporidia) are killed. In the case of embryo death, this diverts investment from males to females who can transmit these cytoplasmic elements (for instance, in ladybird beetles, infected female hosts eat their dead male brothers, which is positive from the viewpoint of the bacterium). In the case of microsporidia-induced larval death, the agent is transmitted out of the male lineage (through which it cannot be transmitted) into the environment, where it may be taken up again infectiously by other individuals. Male-killing occurs in many insects. In the case of male embryo death, a variety of bacteria have been implicated, including Wolbachia.

Male-sterility
In some cases anther tissue (male gametophyte) is killed by mitochondria in monoecious angiosperms, increasing energy and material spent in developing female gametophytes. This leads to a shift from monoecy to gynodioecy, where part of the plants in the population are male-sterile.

Parthenogenesis induction
In certain haplodiploid Hymenoptera and mites, in which males are produced asexually, Wolbachia and Cardinium can induce duplication of the chromosomes and thus convert the organisms into females. The cytoplasmic bacterium forces haploid cells to go through incomplete mitosis to produce diploid cells which therefore will be female. This produces an entirely female population. If antibiotics are administered to populations which have become asexual in this way, they revert to sexuality instantly, as the cytoplasmic bacteria forcing this behaviour upon them are removed.

Cytoplasmic incompatibility
In many arthropods, zygotes produced by sperm of infected males and ova of non-infected females can be killed by Wolbachia or Cardinium.

Evolution of sex
Conflict between chromosomes has been proposed as an element in the evolution of sex.

See also
Green-beard effect

References

== Further reading ==


Memetics is a theory of the evolution of culture based on Darwinian principles with the meme as the unit of culture. The term "meme" was coined by biologist Richard Dawkins in his 1976 book The Selfish Gene, to illustrate the principle that he later called "Universal Darwinism". All evolutionary processes depend on information being copied, varied, and selected, a process also known as variation with selective retention. The information that is copied is called the replicator, and genes are the replicator for biological evolution. Dawkins proposed that the same process drives cultural evolution, and he called this second replicator the "meme". He gave as examples, tunes, catchphrases, fashions, and technologies. Like genes, memes are selfish replicators and have causal efficacy; in other words, their properties influence their chances of being copied and passed on. Some succeed because they are valuable or useful to their human hosts while others are more like viruses.
Just as genes can work together to form co-adapted gene complexes, so groups of memes acting together form co-adapted meme complexes or memeplexes. Memeplexes include (among many other things) languages, traditions, scientific theories, financial institutions, and religions. Dawkins famously referred to religions as "viruses of the mind".Among proponents of memetics are psychologist Susan Blackmore, author of The Meme Machine, who argues that when our ancestors began imitating behaviours, they let loose a second replicator and co-evolved to become the "meme machines" that copy, vary, and select memes in culture. Philosopher Daniel Dennett develops memetics extensively, notably in his books Darwin's Dangerous Idea, and From Bacteria to Bach and Back. He describes the units of memes as "the smallest elements that replicate themselves with reliability and fecundity." and claims that "Human consciousness is itself a huge complex of memes." In The Beginning of Infinity, physicist David Deutsch contrasts static societies that depend on anti-rational memes suppressing innovation and creativity, with dynamic societies based on rational memes that encourage enlightenment values, scientific curiosity, and progress.
Criticisms of memetics include claims that memes do not exist, that the analogy with genes is false, that the units cannot be specified, that culture does not evolve through imitation, and that the sources of variation are intelligently designed rather than random. Critics of memetics include biologist Stephen Jay Gould who calls memetics a "meaningless metaphor". Philosopher Dan Sperber argues against memetics as a viable approach to cultural evolution because cultural items are not directly copied or imitated but are reproduced. Anthropologist Robert Boyd and biologist Peter Richerson work within the alternative, and more mainstream, field of cultural evolution theory and gene-culture coevolution. Dual inheritance theory has much in common with memetics but rejects the idea that memes are replicators. From this perspective, memetics is seen as just one of several approaches to cultural evolution and one that is generally considered less useful than the alternatives of gene-culture coevolution or dual inheritance theory. The main difference is that dual inheritance theory ultimately depends on biological advantage to genes, whereas memetics treats memes as a second replicator in its own right. Memetics also extends to the analysis of Internet culture and Internet memes.

History
In his book The Selfish Gene (1976), the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins used the term meme to describe a unit of human cultural transmission analogous to the gene, arguing that replication also happens in culture, albeit in a different sense. While cultural evolution itself is a much older topic, with a history that dates back at least as far as Darwin's era, Dawkins (1976) proposed that the meme is a unit of culture residing in the brain and is the mutating replicator in human cultural evolution. After Dawkins, many discussed this unit of culture as evolutionary "information" which replicates with rules analogous  to Darwinian selection. A replicator is a pattern that can influence its surroundings – that is, it has causal agency – and can propagate. This proposal resulted in debate among anthropologists, sociologists, biologists, and scientists of other disciplines. Dawkins himself did not provide a sufficient explanation of how the replication of units of information in the brain controls human behaviour and ultimately culture (the principal topic of the book was genetics). Dawkins apparently did not intend to present a comprehensive theory of memetics in The Selfish Gene, but rather coined the term meme in a speculative spirit. Accordingly, different researchers came to define the term "unit of information" in different ways.
The evolutionary model of cultural information transfer is based on the concept that memes—units of information—have an independent existence, are self-replicating, and are subject to selective evolution through environmental forces. Starting from a proposition put forward in the writings of Dawkins, this model has formed the basis of a new area of study, one that looks at the self-replicating units of culture. It has been proposed that just as memes are analogous to genes, memetics is analogous to genetics.
The modern memetics movement dates from the mid-1980s. A January 1983 "Metamagical Themas" column by Douglas Hofstadter, in Scientific American, was influential – as was his 1985 book of the same name. "Memeticist" was coined as analogous to "geneticist" – originally in The Selfish Gene. Later Arel Lucas suggested that the discipline that studies memes and their connections to human and other carriers of them be known as "memetics" by analogy with "genetics". Dawkins' The Selfish Gene has been a factor in attracting the attention of people of disparate intellectual backgrounds. Another stimulus was the publication in 1991 of Consciousness Explained by Tufts University philosopher Daniel Dennett, which incorporated the meme concept into a theory of the mind. In his 1991 essay "Viruses of the Mind", Richard Dawkins used memetics to explain the phenomenon of religious belief and the various characteristics of organised religions. By then, memetics had also become a theme appearing in fiction (e.g. Neal Stephenson's Snow Crash).
The idea of language as a virus had already been introduced by William S. Burroughs as early as 1962 in his fictional book The Ticket That Exploded, and continued in The Electronic Revolution, published in 1970 in The Job.
The foundation of memetics in its full modern incarnation was launched by Douglas Rushkoff's Media Virus: Hidden Agendas in Popular Culture in 1995, and was accelerated with the publication in 1996 of two more books by authors outside the academic mainstream: Virus of the Mind: The New Science of the Meme by former Microsoft executive turned motivational speaker and professional poker-player Richard Brodie, and Thought Contagion: How Belief Spreads Through Society by Aaron Lynch, a mathematician and philosopher who worked for many years as an engineer at Fermilab. Lynch claimed to have conceived his theory totally independently of any contact with academics in the cultural evolutionary sphere, and apparently was not aware of The Selfish Gene until his book was very close to publication.Around the same time as the publication of the books by Lynch and Brodie the e-journal Journal of Memetics – Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission (published electronically from 1997 to 2005) first appeared. It was first hosted by the Centre for Policy Modelling at Manchester Metropolitan University. The e-journal soon became the central point for publication and debate within the nascent memeticist community. (There had been a short-lived paper-based memetics publication starting in 1990, the Journal of Ideas edited by Elan Moritz.) In 1999, Susan Blackmore, a psychologist at the University of the West of England, published The Meme Machine, which more fully worked out the ideas of Dennett, Lynch, and Brodie and attempted to compare and contrast them with various approaches from the cultural evolutionary mainstream, as well as providing novel (and controversial) memetics-based theories for the evolution of language and the human sense of individual selfhood.

Etymology
The term meme derives from the Ancient Greek μιμητής (mimētḗs), meaning "imitator, pretender". The similar term mneme was used in 1904, by the German evolutionary biologist Richard Semon, best known for his development of the engram theory of memory, in his work Die mnemischen Empfindungen in ihren Beziehungen zu den Originalempfindungen, translated into English in 1921 as The Mneme. Until Daniel Schacter published Forgotten Ideas, Neglected Pioneers: Richard Semon and the Story of Memory in 2000, Semon's work had little influence, though it was quoted extensively in Erwin Schrödinger’s 1956 Tarner Lecture “Mind and Matter”. Richard Dawkins (1976) apparently coined the word meme independently of Semon, writing this:

"'Mimeme' comes from a suitable Greek root, but I want a monosyllable that sounds a bit like 'gene'. I hope my classicist friends will forgive me if I abbreviate mimeme to meme. If it is any consolation, it could alternatively be thought of as being related to 'memory', or to the French word même."David Hull (2001) pointed out Dawkins's oversight of Semon's work. Hull suggests this early work as an alternative origin to memetics by which Dawkins's memetic theory and classicist connection to the concept can be negotiated."Why not date the beginnings of memetics (or mnemetics) as 1904 or at the very least 1914? If [Semon's] two publications are taken as the beginnings of memetics, then the development of memetics [...] has been around for almost a hundred years without much in the way of conceptual or empirical advance!"Despite this, Semon's work remains mostly understood as distinct to memetic origins even with the overt similarities accounted for by Hull.

Internalists and externalists
The memetics movement split almost immediately into two. The first group were those who wanted to stick to Dawkins' definition of a meme as "a unit of cultural transmission". Gibron Burchett, a memeticist responsible for helping to research and co-coin the term memetic engineering, along with Leveious Rolando and Larry Lottman, has stated that a meme can be defined, more precisely, as "a unit of cultural information that can be copied, located in the brain". This thinking is more in line with Dawkins' second definition of the meme in his book The Extended Phenotype. The second group wants to redefine memes as observable cultural artifacts and behaviors. However, in contrast to those two positions, the article "Consciousness in meme machines" by Susan Blackmore rejects neither movement.These two schools became known as the "internalists" and the "externalists." Prominent internalists included both Lynch and Brodie; the most vocal externalists included Derek Gatherer, a geneticist from Liverpool John Moores University, and William Benzon, a writer on cultural evolution and music. The main rationale for externalism was that internal brain entities are not observable, and memetics cannot advance as a science, especially a quantitative science, unless it moves its emphasis onto the directly quantifiable aspects of culture. Internalists countered with various arguments: that brain states will eventually be directly observable with advanced technology, that most cultural anthropologists agree that culture is about beliefs and not artifacts, or that artifacts cannot be replicators in the same sense as mental entities (or DNA) are replicators. The debate became so heated that a 1998 Symposium on Memetics, organised as part of the 15th International Conference on Cybernetics, passed a motion calling for an end to definitional debates. McNamara demonstrated in 2011 that functional connectivity profiling using neuroimaging tools enables the observation of the processing of internal memes, "i-memes", in response to external "e-memes".
This was developed further in a paper "Memetics and Neural Models of Conspiracy Theories" by Duch, where a model of memes as a quasi-stable neural associative memory attractor network is proposed, and a formation of Memeplex leading to conspiracy theories illustrated with the simulation of a self-organizing network.An advanced statement of the internalist school came in 2002 with the publication of The Electric Meme, by Robert Aunger, an anthropologist from the University of Cambridge. Aunger also organised a conference in Cambridge in 1999, at which prominent sociologists and anthropologists were able to give their assessment of the progress made in memetics to that date. This resulted in the publication of Darwinizing Culture: The Status of Memetics as a Science, edited by Aunger and with a foreword by Dennett, in 2001.

Decline
In 2005, the Journal of Memetics ceased publication and published a set of articles on the future of memetics. The website states that although "there was to be a relaunch... after several years nothing has happened". Susan Blackmore left the University of the West of England to become a freelance science-writer and now concentrates more on the field of consciousness and cognitive science. Derek Gatherer moved to work as a computer programmer in the pharmaceutical industry, although he still occasionally publishes on memetics-related matters. Richard Brodie is now climbing the world professional poker rankings. Aaron Lynch disowned the memetics community and the words "meme" and "memetics" (without disowning the ideas in his book), adopting the self-description "thought contagionist". He died in 2005.
Susan Blackmore (2002) re-stated the definition of meme as: whatever is copied from one person to another person, whether habits, skills, songs, stories, or any other kind of information. Further she said that memes, like genes, are replicators in the sense as defined by Dawkins.
That is, they are information that is copied. Memes are copied by imitation, teaching and other methods. The copies are not perfect: memes are copied with variation; moreover, they compete for space in our memories and for the chance to be copied again. Only some of the variants can survive. The combination of these three elements (copies; variation; competition for survival) forms precisely the condition for Darwinian evolution, and so memes (and hence human cultures) evolve. Large groups of memes that are copied and passed on together are called co-adapted meme complexes, or memeplexes. In Blackmore's definition, the way that a meme replicates is through imitation. This requires brain capacity to generally imitate a model or selectively imitate the model. Since the process of social learning varies from one person to another, the imitation process cannot be said to be completely imitated. The sameness of an idea may be expressed with different memes supporting it. This is to say that the mutation rate in memetic evolution is extremely high, and mutations are even possible within each and every iteration of the imitation process. It becomes very interesting when we see that a social system composed of a complex network of microinteractions exists, but at the macro level an order emerges to create culture.Many researchers of cultural evolution regard memetic theory of this time a failed paradigm superseded by dual inheritance theory. Others instead suggest it is not superseded but rather holds a small but distinct intellectual space in cultural evolutionary theory.

"Internet Memetics"
A new framework of Internet Memetics initially borrowed Blackmore's conceptual developments but is effectively a data-driven approach, focusing on digital artifacts. This was led primarily by conceptual developments Colin Lankshear and Michele Knobel (2006)  and Limor Shifman and Mike Thelwall (2009). Shiman, in particular, followed Susan Blackmore in rejecting the internalist and externalist debate, however did not offer a clear connection to prior evolutionary frameworks. Later in 2014, she rejected the historical relevance of "information" to memetics. Instead of memes being units of cultural information, she argued information is exclusively delegated to be "the ways in which addressers position themselves in relation to [a meme instance's] text, its linguistic codes, the addressees, and other potential speakers." This is what she called stance, which is analytically distinguished from the content and form of her meme. As such, Shifman's developments can be seen as critical to Dawkins's meme, but also as a somewhat distinct conceptualization of the meme as a communicative system dependent on the internet and social media platforms. By introducing memetics as an internet study there has been a rise in empirical research. That is, memetics in this conceptualization has been notably testable by the application of social science methodologies. It has been popular enough that following Lankshear and Knobel's (2019) review of empirical trends, they warn those interested in memetics that theoretical development should not be ignored, concluding that, "[R]ight now would be a good time for anyone seriously interested in memes to revisit Dawkins’ work in light of how internet memes have evolved over the past three decades and reflect on what most merits careful and conscientious research attention."As Lankshear and Knobel show, the Internet Memetic reconceptualization is limited in addressing long-standing memetic theory concerns. It is not clear that existing Internet Memetic theory's departure from conceptual dichotomies between internalist and externalist debate are compatible with most earlier concerns of memetics. Internet Memetics might be understood as a study without an agreed upon theory, as present research tends to focus on empirical developments answering theories of other areas of cultural research. It exists more as a set of distributed studies than a methodology, theory, field, or discipline, with a few exceptions such as Shifman and those closely following her motivating framework.

Criticisms
Critics contend that some of the proponents' assertions are "untested, unsupported or incorrect." Most of the history of memetic criticism has been directed at Dawkins' earlier theory of memetics framed in The Selfish Gene. There have been some serious criticisms of memetics. Namely, there are a few key points on which most criticisms focus: mentalism, cultural determinism, Darwinian reduction, a lack of academic novelty, and a lack of empirical evidence of memetic mechanisms.
Luis Benitez-Bribiesca points to the lack of memetic mechanisms. He refers to the lack of a code script for memes which would suggest a genuine analogy to DNA in genes. He also suggests the meme mutation mechanism is too unstable which would render the evolutionary process chaotic. That is to say that the "unit of information" which traverses across minds is perhaps too flexible in meaning to be a realistic unit. As such, he calls memetics "a pseudoscientific dogma" and "a dangerous idea that poses a threat to the serious study of consciousness and cultural evolution" among other things.
Another criticism points to memetic triviality. That is, some have argued memetics is derivative of more rich areas of study. One of these cases comes from Peircian semiotics, (e.g., Deacon, Kull) stating that the concept of meme is a less developed Sign. Meme is thus described in memetics as a sign without its triadic nature. Charles Sanders Peirce's semiotic theory involves a triadic structure: a sign (a reference to an object), an object (the thing being referred to), and an interpretant (the interpreting actor of a sign).  For Deacon and Kull, the meme is a degenerate sign, which includes only its ability of being copied. Accordingly, in the broadest sense, the objects of copying are memes, whereas the objects of translation and interpretation are signs.
Others have pointed to the fact that memetics reduces genuine social and communicative activity to genetic arguments, and this cannot adequately describe cultural interactions between people. For example, Henry Jenkins, Joshua Green, and Sam Ford, in their book Spreadable Media (2013), criticize Dawkins' idea of the meme, writing that "while the idea of the meme is a compelling one, it may not adequately account for how content circulates through participatory culture." The three authors also criticize other interpretations of memetics, especially those which describe memes as "self-replicating", because they ignore the fact that "culture is a human product and replicates through human agency." In doing so, they align more closely with Shifman's notion of Internet Memetics and her addition of the human agency of stance to describe participatory structure.
Mary Midgley criticizes memetics for at least two reasons:

Like other critics, Maria Kronfeldner has criticized memetics for being based on an allegedly inaccurate analogy with the gene; alternately, she claims it is "heuristically trivial", being a mere redescription of what is already known without offering any useful novelty.

New developments
Alternative definitions
Dawkins, in A Devil's Chaplain, expanded his definition of meme by saying there are actually two different types of memetic processes (controversial and informative). The first is a type of cultural idea, action, or expression, which does have high variance; for instance, a student of his who had inherited some of the mannerisms of Wittgenstein. The second type is a self-correcting meme that is highly resistant to mutation. As an example of this, he gives origami patterns taught to elementary students– the meme is either passed on in the exact sequence of instructions, or (in the case of a forgetful child) terminates. The self-correcting meme tends to not evolve, and to experience profound mutations in the rare event that it does.
Another definition, given by Hokky Situngkir, tried to offer a more rigorous formalism for the meme, memeplexes, and the deme, seeing the meme as a cultural unit in a cultural complex system. It is based on the Darwinian genetic algorithm with some modifications to account for the different patterns of evolution seen in genes and memes. In the method of memetics as the way to see culture as a complex adaptive system, he describes a way to see memetics as an alternative methodology of cultural evolution.
DiCarlo (2010) developed the definition of meme further to include the idea of 'memetic equilibrium', which describe a culturally compatible state with biological equilibrium. In "How Problem Solving and Neurotransmission in the Upper Paleolithic led to The Emergence and Maintenance of Memetic Equilibrium in Contemporary World Religions", DiCarlo argues that as human consciousness evolved and developed, so too did our ancestors' capacity to consider and attempt to solve environmental problems in more conceptually sophisticated ways. When a satisfactory solution is found, the feeling of environmental stability, or memetic equilibrium, is achieved. The relationship between a gradually emerging conscious awareness and sophisticated languages in which to formulate representations combined with the desire to maintain biological equilibrium, generated the necessity for equilibrium to fill in conceptual gaps in terms of understanding three very important aspects in the Upper Paleolithic: causality, morality, and mortality. The desire to explain phenomena in relation to maintaining survival and reproductive stasis, generated a normative stance in the minds of our ancestors—Survival/Reproductive Value (or S-R Value).
Limor Shifman (2014) defines Internet memes, memes in digitally mediated contexts, to be (a) a group of digital items sharing common characteristics of content, form, and/or stance, which (b) were created with awareness of each other, and (c) were circulated, imitated, and/or transformed via the Internet by many users. Further, she outlines content as "both ideas and ideologies", form as "the physical incarnation of the message", and stance as "the information memes convey about their own communication." Stance is about how actors (e.g. people) position themselves in relation to content and form of the media as well as those who might be addressed by the message.
Over a decade after Kull's and Deacon's semiotic critique, Sara Cannizzaro offered her own development to redeem memes as fully formed cybersemiotic signs which has had limited success among those adjacent to Internet Memetics. In particular, she translates many of the neo-Darwinian conceptualizations of evolution to biosemiotic evolutionary concepts. This approach was theoretically integrated with an empirical investigation of information in Alexander O. Smith and Jeff Hemsley's development. They suggested under the influence of Cannizzaro's work that memes are "an information transmission network of documents connected through their differences among similarities and is interpreted as a semiotic system".

Memetic analysis
The possibility of quantitative analysis of memes using neuroimaging tools and the suggestion that such studies have already been done was given by McNamara (2011).  This author proposes hyperscanning (concurrent scanning of two communicating individuals in two separate MRI machines) as a key tool in the future for investigating memetics.
Velikovsky (2013) proposed the "holon" as the structure of the meme, synthesizing the major theories on memes of Richard Dawkins, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, E. O. Wilson, Frederick Turner (poet) and Arthur Koestler.
Proponents of memetics as described in the Journal of Memetics (out of print since 2005) believe that 'memetics' has the potential to be an important and promising analysis of culture using the framework of evolutionary concepts.
Keith Henson in Memetics and the Modular-Mind (Analog Aug. 1987) makes the case that memetics needs to incorporate evolutionary psychology to understand the psychological traits of a meme's host.
The primary analytic approaches of internet memetics has been more in association with visual culture and communication methodologies. These researchers justify the existence of memes by way of culturally association, social networks or networked artifacts, most notably online image artifacts.

Applications
Research methodologies that apply memetics go by many names: Viral marketing, cultural evolution, the history of ideas, social analytics, and more.  Many of these applications do not make reference to the literature on memes directly but are built upon the evolutionary lens of idea propagation that treats semantic units of culture as self-replicating and mutating patterns of information that are assumed to be relevant for scientific study.  For example, the field of public relations is filled with attempts to introduce new ideas and alter social discourse.  One means of doing this is to design a meme and deploy it through various media channels.  One historic example of applied memetics is the PR campaign conducted in 1991 as part of the build-up to the first Gulf War in the United States.The application of memetics to a difficult complex social system problem, environmental sustainability, has recently been attempted at thwink.org Using meme types and memetic infection in several stock and flow simulation models, Jack Harich has demonstrated several interesting phenomena that are best, and perhaps only, explained by memes. One model, The Dueling Loops of the Political Powerplace, argues that the fundamental reason corruption is the norm in politics is due to an inherent structural advantage of one feedback loop pitted against another. Another model, The Memetic Evolution of Solutions to Difficult Problems, uses memes, the evolutionary algorithm, and the scientific method to show how complex solutions evolve over time and how that process can be improved. The insights gained from these models are being used to engineer memetic solution elements to the sustainability problem.
Another application of memetics in the sustainability space is the crowdfunded Climate Meme Project conducted by Joe Brewer and Balazs Laszlo Karafiath in the spring of 2013. This study was based on a collection of 1000 unique text-based expressions gathered from Twitter, Facebook, and structured interviews with climate activists. The major finding was that the global warming meme is not effective at spreading because it causes emotional duress in the minds of people who learn about it.  Five central tensions were revealed in the discourse about [climate change], each of which represents a resonance point through which dialogue can be engaged.  The tensions were Harmony/Disharmony (whether or not humans are part of the natural world), Survival/Extinction (envisioning the future as either apocalyptic collapse of civilization or total extinction of the human race), Cooperation/Conflict (regarding whether or not humanity can come together to solve global problems), Momentum/Hesitation (about whether or not we are making progress at the collective scale to address climate change), and Elitism/Heretic (a general sentiment that each side of the debate considers the experts of its opposition to be untrustworthy).Ben Cullen, in his book Contagious Ideas, brought the idea of the meme into the discipline of archaeology. He coined the term "Cultural Virus Theory", and used it to try to anchor archaeological theory in a neo-Darwinian paradigm. Archaeological memetics could assist the application of the meme concept to material culture in particular.
Francis Heylighen of the Center Leo Apostel for Interdisciplinary Studies has postulated what he calls "memetic selection criteria". These criteria opened the way to a specialized field of applied memetics to find out if these selection criteria could stand the test of quantitative analyses. In 2003 Klaas Chielens carried out these tests in a Masters thesis project on the testability of the selection criteria.
In Selfish Sounds and Linguistic Evolution, Austrian linguist Nikolaus Ritt has attempted to operationalise memetic concepts and use them for the explanation of long term sound changes and change conspiracies in early English. It is argued that a generalised Darwinian framework for handling cultural change can provide explanations where established, speaker centred approaches fail to do so. The book makes comparatively concrete suggestions about the possible material structure of memes, and provides two empirically rich case studies.
Australian academic S.J. Whitty has argued that project management is a memeplex with the language and stories of its practitioners at its core. This radical approach sees a project and its management as an illusion; a human construct about a collection of feelings, expectations, and sensations, which are created, fashioned, and labeled by the human brain. Whitty's approach requires project managers to consider that the reasons for using project management are not consciously driven to maximize profit, and are encouraged to consider project management as naturally occurring, self-serving, evolving process which shapes organizations for its own purpose.
Swedish political scientist Mikael Sandberg argues against "Lamarckian" interpretations of institutional and technological evolution and studies creative innovation of information technologies in governmental and private organizations in Sweden in the 1990s from a memetic perspective. Comparing the effects of active ("Lamarckian") IT strategy versus user–producer interactivity (Darwinian co-evolution), evidence from Swedish organizations shows that co-evolutionary interactivity is almost four times as strong a factor behind IT creativity as the "Lamarckian" IT strategy.

Terminology
Memeplex – (an abbreviation of meme-complex) is a collection or grouping of memes that have evolved into a mutually supportive or symbiotic relationship. Simply put, a meme-complex is a set of ideas that reinforce each other. Meme-complexes are roughly analogous to the symbiotic collection of individual genes that make up the genetic codes of biological organisms. An example of a memeplex would be a religion.
Meme pool – a population of interbreeding memes.
Memetic engineering – The process of deliberately creating memes, using engineering principles.
Memetic algorithms – an approach to evolutionary computation that attempts to emulate cultural evolution in order to solve optimization problems.
Memotype – the actual information-content of a meme.
Memeoid – a neologism for people who have been taken over by a meme to the extent that their own survival becomes inconsequential. Examples include kamikazes, suicide bombers and cult members who commit mass suicide. The term was apparently coined by H. Keith Henson in "Memes, L5 and the Religion of the Space Colonies," L5 News, September 1985 pp. 5–8, and referenced in the expanded second edition of Richard Dawkins' book The Selfish Gene (p. 330). In The Electronic Revolution William S. Burroughs writes: "the word has not been recognised as a virus because it has achieved a state of stable symbiosis with the host."
Memetic equilibrium – the cultural equivalent of species biological equilibrium. It is that which humans strive for in terms of personal value with respect to cultural artefacts and ideas. The term was coined by Christopher diCarlo.
Metamemetic thinking - coined by Diego Fontanive, is the thinking skill & cognitive training capable of making individuals acknowledge illogical memes.
Eumemics - the belief and practice of deliberately improving the quality of the meme pool.
Memocide - intentional action to eradicate a meme or memeplex from the population, either by killing its carriers or by censorship.

See also
References
Sources
Apter, Emily (2019). Alphabetic Memes: Caricature, Satire, and Political Literacy in the Age of Trump (PDF). OCTOBER Journal 170, Fall 2019, MIT Press Journal
Botz-Bornstein, Thorsten (2008). "Can Memes Play Games? Memetics and the Problem of Space" in T. Botz-Bornstein (ed.): Culture, Nature, Memes: Dynamic Cognitive Theories (Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press), pp. 142–156.
Boyd, Robert & Richerson, Peter J. (1985). Culture and the Evolutionary Process. University of Chicago Press.  ISBN 978-0-226-06933-3
Boyd, Rob & Richerson, Peter J. (2005). Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution. Chicago University Press. ISBN 0-226-71284-2
Boyles, Robert James M. (2011), "The Enemy: A Thought Experiment on Patriarchies, Feminisms and Memes" (PDF), Feminista: Gender, Race, and Class in the Philippines, Philippines: Anvil Publishing, Inc.: 53–64, ISBN 978-971-27-2594-4
DiCarlo, Christopher W. 2010. "How Problem Solving and Neurotransmission in the Upper Paleolithic led to The Emergence and Maintenance of Memetic Equilibrium in Contemporary World Religions." Politics and Culture. https://politicsandculture.org/2010/04/27/how-problem-solving-and-neurotransmission-in-the-upper-paleolithic-led-to-the-emergence-and-maintenance-of-memetic-equilibrium-in-contemporary-world-religions/ Archived 2021-08-23 at the Wayback Machine
Cloak, F.T. (1975). "Is a cultural ethology possible?". Human Ecology. 3 (3): 161–182. doi:10.1007/bf01531639. S2CID 144333714.
Edmonds, Bruce. 2002. "Three challenges for the survival of memetics." Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 6. http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/2002/vol6/edmonds_b_letter.html Archived 2011-05-03 at the Wayback Machine
Edmonds, Bruce. 2005. "The revealed poverty of the gene-meme analogy – why memetics per se has failed." Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission, 9. http://cfpm.org/jom-emit/2005/vol9/edmonds_b.html Archived 2021-07-17 at the Wayback Machine
Heylighen F. & Chielens K. (2009): Evolution of Culture, Memetics, in: Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science, ed. B. Meyers (Springer)
Houben, Jan E.M. "Memetics of Vedic Ritual, Morphology of the Agnistoma." Powerpoint presentation first presented at the Third International Vedic Workshop, Leiden 2002 www.academia.edu/7090834
Houben, Jan E.M. "A Tradição Sânscrita entre Memética Védica e Cultura Literária." (In Portuguese) Revista Linguagem & Ensino, vol. 17 n. 2 (2014), p. 441-469. www.rle.ucpel.tche.br/index.php/rle/article/view/1089/783
The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins, Oxford University Press, 1976, 2nd edition, December 1989, hardcover, 352 pages, ISBN 0-19-217773-7; April 1992, ISBN 0-19-857519-X; trade paperback, September 1990, 352 pages, ISBN 0-19-286092-5
Aunger, Robert. The Electric Meme: A New Theory of How We Think. New York: Free Press, 2002.  ISBN 978-0-7432-0150-6
The Meme Machine by Susan Blackmore, Oxford University Press, 1999, hardcover ISBN 0-19-850365-2, trade paperback ISBN 0-9658817-8-4, May 2000, ISBN 0-19-286212-X
The Ideology of Cybernetic Totalist Intellectuals an essay by Jaron Lanier which is very strongly critical of "meme totalists" who assert memes over bodies.
Culture as Complex Adaptive System by Hokky Situngkir – formal interplays between memetics and cultural analysis.
Journal of Memetics – Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
Brodie, Richard. Virus of the Mind: The New Science of the Meme. Seattle, Wash: Integral Press, 1996.  ISBN 978-0-9636001-1-0
Cultural Software: A Theory of Ideology by Jack Balkin which uses memetics to explain the growth and spread of ideology.
Can we Measure Memes? by Adam McNamara which presents neuroimaging tools to measure memes.
Convivere con la memetica (in Italian) by Francesco Somigli, 2011 Lulu.com

External links
"What’s in a Meme?" – Richard Dawkins Foundation