Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T03:30:06.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - The nature of constraints

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2009

By
Roger Sansom
Edited by
Manfred D. Laubichler  and
Jane Maienschein
Manfred D. Laubichler
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Jane Maienschein
Affiliation:
Arizona State University
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

One of the most striking features of organisms is how well they are suited to live and reproduce in their environments. In general, we are impressed by the level of engineering necessary for an eye to see, or a bird to fly, or the potency of a snake's venom. And the closer one looks, the more marvels one finds, from the manifold adaptive capacities of the liver to the mechanisms of DNA proofreading. With his theory of evolution by natural selection, Charles Darwin provided the naturalistic explanation for such design that is now fundamental to the science of biology.

Although the theory of natural selection is considered Darwin's greatest contribution, his stated primary goal in publishing the Origin of Species was to argue that different species were of common descent.

Although much remains obscure, and will long remain obscure, I can entertain no doubt, after the most deliberate study and dispassionate judgment of which I am capable, that the view which most naturalists entertain, and which I formerly entertained – namely, that each species has been independently created – is erroneous. I am fully convinced that species are not immutable; but that those belonging to what are called the same genera are lineal descendants of some other and generally extinct species, in the same manner as the acknowledged varieties of any one species are the descendants of that species. Furthermore, I am convinced that Natural Selection has been the main but not exclusive means of modification.

(Darwin 1859: 6)
Type
Chapter
Information
Form and Function in Developmental Evolution , pp. 201 - 212
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alberch, P. (1980). Ontogenesis and morphological diversification. American Zoologist 20, 653–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alberch, P. (1982). The generative and regulatory roles of development in evolution. In Mossakowski, D. and Roth, G. (eds.), Environmental Adaptation and Evolution. Stuttgart: Fischer, pp. 19–36.Google Scholar
Alberch, Pere (1989). The logic of monsters: evidence for internal constraint in development and evolution. Geobios. Mémoire spécial 12, 21–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R. (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dullemeijer, P. (1980). Functional morphology and evolutionary biology. Acta Biotheoretica 29, 151–250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emlen, D. J. (1997). Alternative mating tactics and male dimorphism in the horned beetle Onthophagus acuminatus (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae). Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology 41, 335–41.CrossRef
Frankino, W. A., Zwaan, B. J., Stern, D. L., and Brakefield, P. M. (2005). Natural selection and developmental constraints in the evolution of allometries. Science 4(307), 718–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. (1989). A developmental constraint in cerion, with comments on the definition and interpretation of constraint in evolution. Evolution 43(3), 516–39.Google Scholar
Gould, S. (2001). The evolutionary definition of selective agency, validation of the theory of hierarchical selection, and fallacy of selfish gene. In Singh, R., Krimbas, C., Paul, D., and Beatty, J. (eds.), Thinking About Evolution. Cambridge University Press, pp. 208–34.Google Scholar
Gould, S. and Lewontin, R. (1979). The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B 205, 581–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hull, D. (1980). Individuality and selection. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11, 311–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, F. (1992). The Possible and the Actual. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Joron, M. and Brakefield, P. (2003). Captivity masks inbreeding effects on male mating success in butterflies. Nature 424, 191–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kawano, K. (1995). Horn and wing allometry and male dimorphism in giant rhinoceros beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) of tropical Asia and America. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 88, 92–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. (1986). On the Plurality of Worlds. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Maynard Smith, J., Burian, R., Kauffman, S., Alberch, P., Campbell, J., Goodwin, B., Lands, R., Raup, D., and Wolpert, L. (1985). Developmental constraints and evolution. The Quarterly Review of Biology 60, 265–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moczek, A. P. and Emlen, D. J. (2000). Male horn dimorphism in the scarab beetle Onthophagus Taurus: do alternative reproductive tactics favour alternative phenotypes?Animal Behaviour 59, 459–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nijhout, H. F. and Emlen, D. J. (1998). Competition among body parts in the development and evolution of insect morphology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 95, 3685–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Resnik, D. (1995). Developmental constraints and patterns: some pertinent distinctions. Journal of Theoretical Biology 173, 231–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sansom, R. (2003). Constraining the adaptationism debate. Biology and Philosophy 18(4), 493–512(20).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sansom, R. (2007). Legacies of adaptive development. In Sansom, R. and Brandon, R. (eds.), Integrating Evolution and Development: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 173–94.Google Scholar
Schlosser, G. (2007). Functional and developmental constraints on life cycle evolution: an attempt on the architecture of constraints. In Sansom, R. and Brandon, R. (eds.), Integrating Evolution and Development: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 113–72.Google Scholar
Schwenk, K. (1994). A utilitarian approach to evolutionary constraint. Zoology 98, 251–62.Google Scholar
Schwenk, K. (2001). Functional units and their evolution. In Wagner, G. (ed.), The Character Concept in Evolutionary Biology. San Diego: Academic Press, pp. 165–98.Google Scholar
Sober, E. and Wilson, D. S. (1998). Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vogel, S. (2003). Comparative Biomechanics. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wagner, G. and Altenberg, L. (1996). Complex adaptations and the evolution of evolvability. Evolution 50(3), 967–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wagner, G. and Schwenk, K. (2000). Evolutionarily stable configurations: functional integration and the evolution of phenotype stability. Evolutionary Biology 31, 155–217.Google Scholar
Wake, M. H. (1982). Diversity within a framework of constraints. Amphibian reproductive modes. In Mossakowski, D. and Roth, G. (eds.), Environmental Adaptation and Evolution. Stuttgart and New York: Gustav Fischer, pp. 87–106.Google Scholar
Webster, G. and Goodwin, B. (1996). Form and Transformation. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Whyte, L. (1965). Internal Factors in Evolution. London: Tavistock Publications.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×