Ontogeny, anatomy, and the problem of homology

Carl Gegenbaur and the American tradition of cell lineage studies

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this paper we analyze Carl Gegenbaur's conception of the relationship between embryology ("Ontogenie") and comparative anatomy and his related ideas about homology. We argue that Gegenbaur's conviction of the primacy of comparative anatomy and his careful consideration of caenogenesis led him to a more balanced view about the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny than his good friend Ernst Haeckel. We also argue that Gegenbaur's ideas about the centrality of comparative anatomy and his definitions of homology actually laid the conceptual foundations for Hans Spemann's (1915) later analysis of homology. We also analyze Gegenbaur's reception in the United States and how the discussions between E.B. Wilson and Edwin Conklin about the role of the "embryological criterion of homology" and the latter's argument for an even earlier concept of cellular homology reflect the recurring theme of preformism in ontogeny, a theme that finds its modern equivalent in various genetic definitions of homology, only recently challenged by the emerging synthesis of evolutionary developmental biology. Finally, we conclude that Gegenbaur's own careful methodological principles can serve as an important model for proponents of present day "evo-devo", especially with respect to the integration of ontogeny with phylogeny embedded in comparative anatomy.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)194-203
Number of pages10
JournalTheory in Biosciences
Volume122
Issue number2-3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2003

Fingerprint

Comparative Anatomy
Ontogeny
Anatomy
Cell Lineage
ontogeny
homology
anatomy
Homology
Cell
Phylogeny
embryology
phylogeny
cells
Developmental Biology
Embryology
developmental biology
Biological Sciences
synthesis
Centrality
evolutionary biology

Keywords

  • Carl Gegenbaur
  • Cell lineage studies
  • Comparative anatomy
  • Evolutionary developmental biology
  • Homology
  • Ontogeny

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)

Cite this

@article{c236e7768bb348da9098fd82f2c084e6,
title = "Ontogeny, anatomy, and the problem of homology: Carl Gegenbaur and the American tradition of cell lineage studies",
abstract = "In this paper we analyze Carl Gegenbaur's conception of the relationship between embryology ({"}Ontogenie{"}) and comparative anatomy and his related ideas about homology. We argue that Gegenbaur's conviction of the primacy of comparative anatomy and his careful consideration of caenogenesis led him to a more balanced view about the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny than his good friend Ernst Haeckel. We also argue that Gegenbaur's ideas about the centrality of comparative anatomy and his definitions of homology actually laid the conceptual foundations for Hans Spemann's (1915) later analysis of homology. We also analyze Gegenbaur's reception in the United States and how the discussions between E.B. Wilson and Edwin Conklin about the role of the {"}embryological criterion of homology{"} and the latter's argument for an even earlier concept of cellular homology reflect the recurring theme of preformism in ontogeny, a theme that finds its modern equivalent in various genetic definitions of homology, only recently challenged by the emerging synthesis of evolutionary developmental biology. Finally, we conclude that Gegenbaur's own careful methodological principles can serve as an important model for proponents of present day {"}evo-devo{"}, especially with respect to the integration of ontogeny with phylogeny embedded in comparative anatomy.",
keywords = "Carl Gegenbaur, Cell lineage studies, Comparative anatomy, Evolutionary developmental biology, Homology, Ontogeny",
author = "Manfred Laubichler and Jane Maienschein",
year = "2003",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1078/1431-7613-00083",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "122",
pages = "194--203",
journal = "Theory in Biosciences",
issn = "1431-7613",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "2-3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ontogeny, anatomy, and the problem of homology

T2 - Carl Gegenbaur and the American tradition of cell lineage studies

AU - Laubichler, Manfred

AU - Maienschein, Jane

PY - 2003/6

Y1 - 2003/6

N2 - In this paper we analyze Carl Gegenbaur's conception of the relationship between embryology ("Ontogenie") and comparative anatomy and his related ideas about homology. We argue that Gegenbaur's conviction of the primacy of comparative anatomy and his careful consideration of caenogenesis led him to a more balanced view about the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny than his good friend Ernst Haeckel. We also argue that Gegenbaur's ideas about the centrality of comparative anatomy and his definitions of homology actually laid the conceptual foundations for Hans Spemann's (1915) later analysis of homology. We also analyze Gegenbaur's reception in the United States and how the discussions between E.B. Wilson and Edwin Conklin about the role of the "embryological criterion of homology" and the latter's argument for an even earlier concept of cellular homology reflect the recurring theme of preformism in ontogeny, a theme that finds its modern equivalent in various genetic definitions of homology, only recently challenged by the emerging synthesis of evolutionary developmental biology. Finally, we conclude that Gegenbaur's own careful methodological principles can serve as an important model for proponents of present day "evo-devo", especially with respect to the integration of ontogeny with phylogeny embedded in comparative anatomy.

AB - In this paper we analyze Carl Gegenbaur's conception of the relationship between embryology ("Ontogenie") and comparative anatomy and his related ideas about homology. We argue that Gegenbaur's conviction of the primacy of comparative anatomy and his careful consideration of caenogenesis led him to a more balanced view about the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny than his good friend Ernst Haeckel. We also argue that Gegenbaur's ideas about the centrality of comparative anatomy and his definitions of homology actually laid the conceptual foundations for Hans Spemann's (1915) later analysis of homology. We also analyze Gegenbaur's reception in the United States and how the discussions between E.B. Wilson and Edwin Conklin about the role of the "embryological criterion of homology" and the latter's argument for an even earlier concept of cellular homology reflect the recurring theme of preformism in ontogeny, a theme that finds its modern equivalent in various genetic definitions of homology, only recently challenged by the emerging synthesis of evolutionary developmental biology. Finally, we conclude that Gegenbaur's own careful methodological principles can serve as an important model for proponents of present day "evo-devo", especially with respect to the integration of ontogeny with phylogeny embedded in comparative anatomy.

KW - Carl Gegenbaur

KW - Cell lineage studies

KW - Comparative anatomy

KW - Evolutionary developmental biology

KW - Homology

KW - Ontogeny

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0037789246&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0037789246&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1078/1431-7613-00083

DO - 10.1078/1431-7613-00083

M3 - Article

VL - 122

SP - 194

EP - 203

JO - Theory in Biosciences

JF - Theory in Biosciences

SN - 1431-7613

IS - 2-3

ER -