Decisions, Decisions: Why Thomas Hunt Morgan Was Not the "Father" of Evo-Devo.
Although the construction of neo-Darwinism grew out of Thomas Hunt Morgan's melding of Darwinism and Mendelism, his evidence did not soley support a model of gradual change. To the contrary, he was confronted with observations that could have led him to a more "evo-devo" understanding of the emergen...
| Publicado en: | Philosophy of Science Vol. 73; no. 5; pp. 918 - 930 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
Dec2006
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=27159523&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 27159523 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00318248 PSC jtl: Philosophy of Science issn: 00318248 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Dec2006 vid: 73 iid: 5 pid: 15979 pub: Cambridge University Press artinfo: ui: 27159523 10.1086/518779 ppf: 918 ppct: 12 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 742KB tig: atl: Decisions, Decisions: Why Thomas Hunt Morgan Was Not the "Father" of Evo-Devo. aug: au: Schwartz, Jeffrey H. affil: Departments of Anthropology and History and Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260 su: Morgan, Thomas Hunt, 1866-1945 Biological evolution Genetic mutation Morphology Embryology Developmental biology sug: subj: Morgan, Thomas Hunt, 1866-1945 Biological evolution Genetic mutation Morphology Embryology Developmental biology ab: Although the construction of neo-Darwinism grew out of Thomas Hunt Morgan's melding of Darwinism and Mendelism, his evidence did not soley support a model of gradual change. To the contrary, he was confronted with observations that could have led him to a more "evo-devo" understanding of the emergence of novel features. Indeed. since Morgan was an embryologist before he became a fruit-fly geneticist, one would have predicted that the combination of these two lines of research would have resulted in early formulations of concepts relevant to evolutionary developmental biology. It is thus of interest to review Morgan's thought processes and arguments for at first rejecting both Darwinism and Mendelism, and then for later dismissing data that would have yielded a model of rapid morphological change in favor of a model of change based on the accumulation of minor mutations and their morphological consequences. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Philosophy of Science holder: Cambridge University Press dt: @attributes: year: 2006 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|