Evolutionary developmental biology of the tetrapod limb

Development ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 1994 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. 163-168
Author(s):  
J. Richard Hinchliffe

New insights into the origin of the tetrapod limb, and its early development and patterning, are emerging from a variety of fields. A wide diversity of approaches was reported at the BSDB Spring Symposium on `The Evolution of Developmental Mechanisms' (Edinburgh, 1994); here I review the contributions these various approaches have made to understanding the evolutionary developmental biology of the tetrapod limb. The fields covered included palaeontology, descriptive embryology, experimental embryological analysis of interactions within developing limbs plus description and manipulation of homeobox gene expression in early limb buds. Concepts are equally varied, sometimes conflicting, sometimes overlapping. Some concern the limb `archetype' (can the palaeontologists and morphologists still define this with precision? how far is there a limb developmental bauplan?); others are based on identification of epigenetic factors (eg secondary inductions), as generating pattern; while yet others assume a direct gene-morphology relationship. But all the contributors ask the same compelling question: can we explain both the similarity (homology) and variety of tetrapod limbs (and the fins of the Crossopterygians) in terms of developmental mechanisms?

Author(s):  
David F. Bjorklund

Evolutionary developmental biology, or Evo Devo, examines how developmental mechanisms affect evolutionary change. Heterochrony refers to genetic-based differences in developmental timing. One important type of heterochrony for humans is neoteny, which refers to the retention of juvenile traits into later development. Humans are a neotenous species, as seen in infants’ features of “babyness,” which promote attention and caring from adults, extending the primate prenatal brain growth rate well past birth, and a reduction of reactive aggression relative to great apes, which facilitated increased cooperation among group members. Homo sapiens extended the time it takes to reach adulthood by inventing new two life stages—childhood and adolescence. The social and cognitive abilities of Homo sapiens’ youth may be well suited to the childhood and adolescent stages and to the attainment of skills necessary for developing into functional adults.


2004 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holger Winter ◽  
Kerstin Korn ◽  
Rudolf Rigler

Author(s):  
Alan C. Love

Many researchers have argued that evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo) constitutes a challenge to standard evolutionary theory, requiring the explicit inclusion of developmental processes that generate variation and attention to organismal form (rather than adaptive function). An analysis of these developmental-form challenges indicates that the primary concern is not the inclusion of specific content but the epistemic organization or structure of evolutionary theory. Proponents of developmental-form challenges favor moving their considerations to a more central location in evolutionary theorizing, in part because of a commitment to the value of mechanistic explanation. This chapter argues there are multiple legitimate structures for evolutionary theory, instead of a single, overarching or canonical organization, and different theory presentations can be understood as idealizations that serve different investigative and explanatory goals in evolutionary inquiry.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document