Author | Stephen Jay Gould |
---|---|
Language | English |
Subjects | Ontogeny, phylogeny |
Publisher | Belknap Press of Harvard University Press |
Publication date | 1977 |
Publication place | United States |
Media type | |
Pages | 501 |
ISBN | 0674639405 |
LC Class | QH371 .G68 |
Ontogeny and Phylogeny is a 1977 book on evolution by Stephen Jay Gould, in which he explores the relationship between embryonic development (ontogeny) and biological evolution (phylogeny). Unlike his many popular books of essays, it was a technical book, and over the following decades it was influential in stimulating research into heterochrony (changes in the timing of embryonic development), which had been neglected since Ernst Haeckel's theory that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny [a] had been largely discredited. This helped to create the field of evolutionary developmental biology.
Ontogeny and Phylogeny is Stephen Jay Gould's first technical book. He wrote that Ernst Mayr had suggested in passing that he write a book on development. Gould stated he "only began it as a practice run to learn the style of lengthy exposition before embarking on my magnum opus about macroevolution." [2] This later work was published in 2002 as The Structure of Evolutionary Theory . [3]
The book was published in 1977 by Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. [2]
The first half of the book explores Ernst Haeckel's biogenetic law (recapitulation)—the discredited idea that embryonic developmental stages replay the evolutionary transitions of adult forms of an organism's past descendants—and how this idea influenced thinking in biology, theology, and psychology. Gould begins with the ancient Greek philosopher Anaximander, showing that the ideas formed a tradition leading to the French naturalist Charles Bonnet. Gould describes the recapitulationists in the 19th century, from the German Lorenz Oken and Johann Friedrich Meckel to the French Étienne Serres. The book examines the criticism of the theory by the Baltic German Karl Ernst von Baer and the Swiss-American Louis Agassiz, and relates 19th century phylogeny to Charles Darwin's 1859 theory of evolution, Haeckel's approach, and neo-Lamarckism. A chapter examines the pervasive influence of recapitulationism on such subjects as criminal anthropology, racism, attitudes to child development and primary schooling, and to Freudian psychoanalysis.
The second half of the book details how modern concepts such as heterochrony (changes in developmental timing) and neoteny (the retardation of developmental expression or growth rates) influence macroevolution (major evolutionary transitions). Gould examines the ecological and evolutionary significance of heterochrony, with an analysis of its effect on insect metamorphosis and neoteny in amphibians. He ends by considering theories of neoteny in human evolution, including Louis Bolk's so-called fetalization theory.
The herpetologist David B. Wake, in Paleobiology , wrote that the topic was "at once so obviously important and so intrinsically difficult" that few people would tackle it. The parallelism that Haeckel noted between ontogeny and phylogeny was, Wake observed, a strong argument for evolution, but hardly anyone dared to discuss it. He called the book very good, and predicted that it would set the stage for "endless research", but found it also in a way unsatisfying, using "undigested theory from ecology to explain what is, as yet, unexplainable. Summing up, Wake calls the book "erudite, important, provocative, and controversial", but noted that it could have been much shorter. [5]
The embryologist Søren Løvtrup, in Systematic Zoology, noted that the book had two objectives, unexceptionably to gain practice, and "more dubious[ly]", to show that "in spite of the collapse of Haeckel's biogenetic law, the subject of parallels between ontogenesis and phylogenesis is still of importance to biology". [6] In Løvtrup's view, this was because Haeckel's law had been refuted except where evolution had by chance happened to add to the end of development. Gould had little new to report, as people knew half a century earlier that development could be modified at other stages; the book was "a great disappointment." Haeckel could "of course be of historical interest" but Gould had chosen not to research Haeckel's influence. Work on "wrong theories" represented, Løvtrup wrote, "a terrible waste of effort and time, and block[ed] further progress." [6]
The anthropologist C. Loring Brace, in American Anthropologist, noted that two years earlier, E. O. Wilson's Sociobiology had with "woeful ignorance" strayed into anthropology, and Wilson's "bright young colleague" Gould had now done the same thing, possibly making trouble for years to come. Gould was "a wonderful writer, literate, erudite, gracefully witty, and gifted with the ability to present difficult material in a straightforward and easily readable fashion." [7] The bulk of the book was fine, though of no interest to anthropologists. But the tenth chapter, "Retardation and Neoteny in Human Evolution", would "mislead a great many people" who would be unable to make an informed judgement about its conclusions. Gould "turns out to be just as much of a teleologist and progressivist as the scholars of previous generations whom he appraises so effectively. He notes that we associate 'cute' features with mammals of higher intelligence, features that show 'the common traits of babyhood: relatively large eyes, short face, smooth features, bulbous cranium. The presence of this complex in advanced adult mammals argues for neoteny' (Gould p. 350)." [7] In Brace's view, "Gould's main thesis founders between the Scylla of mosaic evolution and the Charybdis of Darwinian theory." [7] Brace concluded that Gould had provided "nothing more useful than the vision that human form can be understood by regarding 'man' as an overgrown retarded child." [7]
James Gorman, in The New York Times , wrote that the book was rich but not easy to read; it was primarily for biologists, with long and precise arguments in technical language; a simpler account of the same topic was to be found in Gould's essay "Ever Since Darwin". Gorman called the book scholarly, entertaining and informative, expressed "with clarity and wit". [8]
The zoologist A. J. Cain, in Nature , called it "a superb analysis of the use of ontogenetic analogy, the controversies over ontogeny and phylogeny, and the classification of the different processes observable in comparing different ontogenies." [9] It was a "massive book", in Cain's view excellently illustrated with often surprising examples, covering both the history and a functional interpretation of heterochrony. Cain found it refreshing to find someone who had a good word for Ernst Haeckel, and who did not "treat Charles Bonnet as a stupid monomaniac" but who brought out the relationship "between acquired characters and recapitulation in the work of the American neo-Lamarckians". [9]
The evolutionary biologists Kenneth McNamara and Michael McKinney stated in 2005 that of all the books that Gould wrote in his career, "the one with the most impact is probably Ontogeny and Phylogeny ... to say that this work is a hallmark in this area of evolutionary theory would be an understatement. It proved to be the catalyst for much of the future work in the field, and to a large degree was the inspiration for the modern field of evolutionary developmental biology. Gould's hope was to show that the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny is fundamental to evolution, and at its heart is a simple premise—that variations in the timing and rate of development provide the raw material upon which natural selection can operate." [11]
M. Elizabeth Barnes, in The Embryo Project Encyclopedia, looking back at the book in 2014, writes that it became widely cited in evolutionary and developmental biology, encouraging research on acceleration and retardation of development (forms of heterochrony), and investigation of paedomorphosis in human evolution. Barnes notes that "along with other work by Gould, such as 'The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm' [the book] is often credited for influencing the rise of a biological approach called evolutionary developmental biology or evo-devo, which worked to integrate evolutionary and developmental biology." [10]
Ernst Heinrich Philipp August Haeckel was a German zoologist, naturalist, eugenicist, philosopher, physician, professor, marine biologist and artist. He discovered, described and named thousands of new species, mapped a genealogical tree relating all life forms and coined many terms in biology, including ecology, phylum, phylogeny, and Protista. Haeckel promoted and popularised Charles Darwin's work in Germany and developed the debunked but influential recapitulation theory, falsely claiming that an individual organism's biological development, or ontogeny, parallels and summarizes its species' evolutionary development, or phylogeny, using incorrectly redrawn images of human embryonic development, images which heavily influenced the public to believe in the theory of evolution. Whether he intentionally falsified the images or drew them poorly by accident is a matter of debate.
Embryo drawing is the illustration of embryos in their developmental sequence. In plants and animals, an embryo develops from a zygote, the single cell that results when an egg and sperm fuse during fertilization. In animals, the zygote divides repeatedly to form a ball of cells, which then forms a set of tissue layers that migrate and fold to form an early embryo. Images of embryos provide a means of comparing embryos of different ages, and species. To this day, embryo drawings are made in undergraduate developmental biology lessons.
Neoteny, also called juvenilization, is the delaying or slowing of the physiological, or somatic, development of an organism, typically an animal. Neoteny in modern humans is more significant than in other primates. In progenesis or paedogenesis, sexual development is accelerated.
The theory of recapitulation, also called the biogenetic law or embryological parallelism—often expressed using Ernst Haeckel's phrase "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny"—is a historical hypothesis that the development of the embryo of an animal, from fertilization to gestation or hatching (ontogeny), goes through stages resembling or representing successive adult stages in the evolution of the animal's remote ancestors (phylogeny). It was formulated in the 1820s by Étienne Serres based on the work of Johann Friedrich Meckel, after whom it is also known as the Meckel–Serres law.
Ontogeny is the origination and development of an organism, usually from the time of fertilization of the egg to adult. The term can also be used to refer to the study of the entirety of an organism's lifespan.
Evolutionary developmental biology is a field of biological research that compares the developmental processes of different organisms to infer how developmental processes evolved.
This is a list of topics in evolutionary biology.
Carl Gegenbaur was a German anatomist and professor who demonstrated that the field of comparative anatomy offers important evidence supporting of the theory of evolution. As a professor of anatomy at the University of Jena (1855–1873) and at the University of Heidelberg (1873–1903), Carl Gegenbaur was a strong supporter of Charles Darwin's theory of organic evolution, having taught and worked, beginning in 1858, with Ernst Haeckel, eight years his junior.
In evolutionary developmental biology, heterochrony is any genetically controlled difference in the timing, rate, or duration of a developmental process in an organism compared to its ancestors or other organisms. This leads to changes in the size, shape, characteristics and even presence of certain organs and features. It is contrasted with heterotopy, a change in spatial positioning of some process in the embryo, which can also create morphological innovation. Heterochrony can be divided into intraspecific heterochrony, variation within a species, and interspecific heterochrony, phylogenetic variation, i.e. variation of a descendant species with respect to an ancestral species.
In biology, saltation is a sudden and large mutational change from one generation to the next, potentially causing single-step speciation. This was historically offered as an alternative to Darwinism. Some forms of mutationism were effectively saltationist, implying large discontinuous jumps.
A body plan, Bauplan, or ground plan is a set of morphological features common to many members of a phylum of animals. The vertebrates share one body plan, while invertebrates have many.
Sir Gavin Rylands de Beer was a British evolutionary embryologist, known for his work on heterochrony as recorded in his 1930 book Embryos and Ancestors. He was director of the Natural History Museum, London, president of the Linnean Society of London, and a winner of the Royal Society's Darwin Medal for his studies on evolution.
Caenogenesis is the introduction during embryonic development of characters or structure not present in the earlier evolutionary history of the strain or species, as opposed to palingenesis. Notable examples include the addition of the placenta in mammals.
Walter Garstang FLS FZS, a Fellow of Lincoln College, Oxford and Professor of Zoology at the University of Leeds, was one of the first to study the functional biology of marine invertebrate larvae. His best known works on marine larvae were his poems published as Larval Forms and Other Zoological Verses, especially The Ballad of the Veliger. They describe the form and function of several marine larvae as well as illustrating some controversies in evolutionary biology of the time.
Gerd B. Müller is an Austrian biologist who is emeritus professor at the University of Vienna where he was the head of the Department of Theoretical Biology in the Center for Organismal Systems Biology. His research interests focus on vertebrate limb development, evolutionary novelties, evo-devo theory, and the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis. He is also concerned with the development of 3D based imaging tools in developmental biology.
Susan Oyama is a psychologist and philosopher of science, currently professor emerita at the John Jay College and CUNY Graduate Center in New York City.
Alessandro Minelli is an Italian biologist, formerly a professor of zoology in the Faculty of Mathematical, Physical and Natural Sciences of the University of Padova, mainly working on evo-devo subjects.
Heterotopy is an evolutionary change in the spatial arrangement of an animal's embryonic development, complementary to heterochrony, a change to the rate or timing of a development process. It was first identified by Ernst Haeckel in 1866 and has remained less well studied than heterochrony.
In developmental biology, von Baer's laws of embryology are four rules proposed by Karl Ernst von Baer to explain the observed pattern of embryonic development in different species.
Human evolutionary developmental biology or informally human evo-devo is the human-specific subset of evolutionary developmental biology. Evolutionary developmental biology is the study of the evolution of developmental processes across different organisms. It is utilized within multiple disciplines, primarily evolutionary biology and anthropology. Groundwork for the theory that "evolutionary modifications in primate development might have led to … modern humans" was laid by Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Ernst Haeckel, Louis Bolk, and Adolph Schultz. Evolutionary developmental biology is primarily concerned with the ways in which evolution affects development, and seeks to unravel the causes of evolutionary innovations.