Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

On Homology and the Ontological Relationship of Parts

On Homology and the Ontological Relationship of Parts AbstractRecent literature suggests that a phylogenetic orientation may lead to unique perspectives on homology. An analysis of absence of avian hind limb flexors is used to explore this perspective. This approach suggests that synapomorphy is not equivalent to homology but rather that synapomorphies are hypotheses of homology (otherwise phylogenetic analysis is tautological). Homologies should be viewed as relationships among historical individuals, and we can only discover interorganismic homologies by phylogenetic analysis. Intraorganismic homologies, however, must be studied by other methods, primarily ontogenetic ones. Viewing homologies as (1) genetically and developmentally individualized entities or (2) sets of historical individuals may not always be particularly helpful from an operational perspective, but this is irrelevant because homologies are real entities that must be discovered, yet the process by which they are sought, as in all science, is one that does not yield truths, only hypotheses. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Systematic Biology Oxford University Press

On Homology and the Ontological Relationship of Parts

McKitrick, Mary C.
Systematic Biology , Volume 43 (1) – Mar 1, 1994
Download PDF
10 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/on-homology-and-the-ontological-relationship-of-parts-tdGx0CyUj5

References (7)

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© 1994 Society of Systematic Biologists
ISSN
1063-5157
eISSN
1076-836X
DOI
10.1093/sysbio/43.1.1
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractRecent literature suggests that a phylogenetic orientation may lead to unique perspectives on homology. An analysis of absence of avian hind limb flexors is used to explore this perspective. This approach suggests that synapomorphy is not equivalent to homology but rather that synapomorphies are hypotheses of homology (otherwise phylogenetic analysis is tautological). Homologies should be viewed as relationships among historical individuals, and we can only discover interorganismic homologies by phylogenetic analysis. Intraorganismic homologies, however, must be studied by other methods, primarily ontogenetic ones. Viewing homologies as (1) genetically and developmentally individualized entities or (2) sets of historical individuals may not always be particularly helpful from an operational perspective, but this is irrelevant because homologies are real entities that must be discovered, yet the process by which they are sought, as in all science, is one that does not yield truths, only hypotheses.

Journal

Systematic Biology – Oxford University Press

Published: Mar 1, 1994

There are no references for this article.