Publication | Closed Access
Deconstructing morphology
298
Citations
57
References
2009
Year
Animal TaxonomyTaxonomyAnimal FormAnatomyMorphology (Linguistics)Comparative AnatomyPhylogeneticsEvolutionary TaxonomyAnimal AnatomyMorphological EvidenceMorphologyHomology AssessmentG. 2010Morphological AnalysisBiologyNatural SciencesEvolutionary BiologyEvolutionary AnatomyMedicineLinguistics
Morphology, the science of animal form, has a long pre‑Darwinian, typological tradition yet also embraces transformation, leading to mixed structural, functional, developmental, ecological, typological, and evolutionary concepts. The study aims to deconstruct morphological concepts at all levels to resolve contradictory interpretations of animal form. The proposed method analyzes transformation of animal forms strictly at the structural level with genealogical thinking, then separately considers function and other aspects, using a comparative pattern approach that incorporates developmental patterns within an evolutionary framework to assess morphological change, phylogeny, homology, and independent units. Scholtz, G.
Abstract Scholtz, G. 2010. Deconstructing morphology. — Acta Zoologica (Stockholm) 91 : 44–63 Morphology as the science of form is, in particular, related to the overwhelming diversity of animal forms. Due to its long pre‐Darwinian tradition, organismic morphology is partly burdened by ahistorical typological views. On the other hand, the study of organismic form has always implied concepts of transformation, which helped to pave the way for evolutionary theories. This contradictory history and the fact that we need words to describe organismic form lead in many cases to morphological concepts implying a mixture of structural, functional, developmental, ecological, typological, and evolutionary aspects in current morphological approaches. Because these mixed views lead to contradictory and misleading interpretations of animal form, I stress the need to deconstruct morphological concepts at all levels. I propose a morphology that analyses transformation of animal forms strictly at the structural level in combination with genealogical thinking. Function and other biological aspects of form should be considered in an independent second analytical step. A comparative pattern approach, including developmental patterns, of animal structure in an evolutionary framework allows for the analysis of morphological change, in particular, phylogenetic reconstructions, homology assessment, and the recognition of evolutionary independent morphological units.
| Year | Citations | |
|---|---|---|
Page 1
Page 1