Literature DB >> 17046362

The failure of morphology to contribute to the modern synthesis.

Michael T Ghiselin1.   

Abstract

How much, if anything, morphology contributed to the modern synthesis is partly a matter of how one defines that term. In the strict sense, morphology is a purely formal discipline and had very little to contribute. Morphology may also be considered a kind of data, and when it becomes functional a better case can be made for its role in evolutionary studies. Be that as it may, the incorporation of morphology into the synthesis was a later development. The initial focus was at the populational level, including the problems of speciation, which makes sense because that was where the opportunities seemed to be. As the synthesis evolved and matured it expanded its horizons and incorporated a larger range of topics. Very little discussion of morphology occurs in the canonical writings of the so-called architects. At the time when the synthesis was supposedly complete, which was around 1950, the incorporation of morphology into it was just beginning.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 17046362     DOI: 10.1016/j.thbio.2005.11.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Theory Biosci        ISSN: 1431-7613            Impact factor:   1.919


  2 in total

1.  Unifying biology: the evolutionary synthesis and evolutionary biology.

Authors:  V B Smocovitis
Journal:  J Hist Biol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 1.326

2.  On the 150(th) Anniversary of Darwin's Submission of One of his "Five Great Books", The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication, to his publisher John Murray.

Authors: 
Journal:  Alzheimers Dement       Date:  2015-12-19       Impact factor: 21.566

  2 in total
  1 in total

Review 1.  Evolution and development: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Olaf Breidbach; Michael T Ghiselin
Journal:  Theory Biosci       Date:  2007-03-26       Impact factor: 1.919

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.