Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On Novelty, Heterochrony and Developmental Constraints in a Complex Morphological Theory of Recapitulation: The Genus Trophon as a Case Study

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Evolutionary Biology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Darwin proposed natural selection as the main evolutionary mechanism in 1859. However, he did not think that this was the only process by which new species were generated. It was the so-called Modern Synthesis who established natural selection as the only mechanism responsible for evolution. Since then, the evolutionary process is explained by the pair mutation-adaptation: new species are generated by the appearance of new mutations, which in case of allowing new adaptations to the environment, they will be fixed and organisms will survive, therefore resulting in new species. An alternative view to the plasticity promoted by the adaptationist program is to think organisms as truly organized structures, having different levels of structural organization, which would mean that not every form is possible, but only those that correspond to a certain building plan. This would be reflected in the appearance of structural constraints, showing the limits imposed to the organism during its evolutionary development. In this work, I studied the ontogeny and development of three species of the genus Trophon by geometric morphometrics, in order to clarify important concepts in evolutionary developmental biology (Evo-Devo). Integrating theoretical and empirical investigations, I could propose a new conceptual framework for heterochrony in a context of a complex theory of recapitulation. Furthermore, I could detect a developmental constraint in Trophon, which provided an opportunity to reconstruct the concept of constraint and propose a synthesis between heterochrony and constraint that explained evolution as a process fueled by them, that is, as directive and driving force.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, D. C., & Otárola-Castillo, E. (2013). Geomorph: An R package for the collection and analysis of geometric morphometric shape data. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 4(4), 393–399.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, D. C., Rohlf, F. J., & Slice, D. E. (2004). Geometric morphometrics: Ten years of progress following the “revolution”. Italian Journal of Zoology, 71(1), 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alberch, P. (1989). The logic of monsters: Evidence for internal constraint in development and evolution. Geobios, 22, 21–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alberch, P., Gould, S. J., Oster, G. F., & Wake, D. B. (1979). Size and shape in ontogeny and phylogeny. Paleobiology, 5(3), 296–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, W. (2002). The emerging conceptual framework of evolutionary developmental biology. Nature, 415(6873), 757–764.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Arthur, W. (2004). The effect of development on the direction of evolution: Toward a twenty-first century consensus. Evolution & Development, 6(4), 282–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, S. (1878). Life and habit. London: Trübner and Co.

    Google 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.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dépraz, A., Hausser, J., & Pfenninger, M. (2009). A species delimitation approach in the Trochulus sericeus/hispidus complex reveals two cryptic species within a sharp contact zone. BMC Evolutionary Biology, 9(1), 171.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, P. (2003). VEGAN, a package of R functions for community ecology. Journal of Vegetation Science, 14(6), 927–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eble, G. J. (2003). Developmental morphospaces and evolution. In J. P. Crutchfield & P. Schuster (Eds.), Evolutionary dynamics: Exploring the interplay of selection, accident, neutrality, and function (pp. 35–66). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Futuyma, D. J. (2005). Evolution. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gayon, J. (2000). History of the concept of allometry. American Zoologist, 40(5), 748–758.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerber, S., & Hopkins, M. J. (2011). Mosaic heterochrony and evolutionary modularity: The trilobite genus Zacanthopsis as a case study. Evolution, 65(11), 3241–3252.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, B. (1963). Temporal organization in cells. A dynamic theory of cellular control processes. London, New York: Academic Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (1966). Allometry and size in ontogeny and phylogeny. Biological Reviews, 41(4), 587–640.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (1977). Ontogeny and phylogeny. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (1989). A developmental constraint in Cerion, with comments on the definition and interpretation of constraint in evolution. Evolution, 43(3), 516–539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J. (2000). Of coiled oysters and big brains: How to rescue the terminology of heterochrony, now gone astray. Evolution & Development, 2(5), 241–248.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, S. J., & Lewontin, R. C. (1979). The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 205(1161), 581–598.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Haeckel, E. (1879). The evolution of man (Vol. 1). New York: Appleton and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ihaka, R., & Gentleman, R. (1996). R: a language for data analysis and graphics. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 5(3), 299–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klingenberg, C. P. (1998). Heterochrony and allometry: The analysis of evolutionary change in ontogeny. Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 73(01), 79–123.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klingenberg, C. P. (2010). Evolution and development of shape: Integrating quantitative approaches. Nature Reviews Genetics, 11(9), 623–635.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, D. E., Carlo, J., Ponce de León, M., & Zollikofer, C. P. (2007). A geometric morphometric analysis of heterochrony in the cranium of chimpanzees and bonobos. Journal of Human Evolution, 52(6), 647–662.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mitteroecker, P., & Gunz, P. (2009). Advances in geometric morphometrics. Evolutionary Biology, 36(2), 235–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitteroecker, P., Gunz, P., Bernhard, M., Schaefer, K., & Bookstein, F. L. (2004). Comparison of cranial ontogenetic trajectories among great apes and humans. Journal of Human Evolution, 46(6), 679–698.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mitteroecker, P., Gunz, P., & Bookstein, F. L. (2005). Heterochrony and geometric morphometrics: A comparison of cranial growth in Pan paniscus versus Pan troglodytes. Evolution & Development, 7(3), 244–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pastorino, G. (2002). Systematics and phylogeny of the genus Trophon Montfort, 1810 (Gastropoda: Muricidae) from Patagonia and Antarctica: Morphological patterns. Bollettino Malacologico, 38(4), 127–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pastorino, G. (2005). A revision of the genus Trophon Montfort, 1810 (Gastropoda: Muricidae) from southern South America. The Nautilus, 119(2), 55–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piras, P., Salvi, D., Ferrara, G., Maiorino, L., Delfino, M., Pedde, L., & Kotsakis, T. (2011). The role of post-natal ontogeny in the evolution of phenotypic diversity in Podarcis lizards. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 24(12), 2705–2720.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team. (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riedl, R. (1977). A systems-analytical approach to macro-evolutionary phenomena. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 52(4), 351–370.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rohlf, F. J. (1998). On applications of geometric morphometrics to studies of ontogeny and phylogeny. Systematic Biology, 47(1), 147–158.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rohlf, F. (2010). TPSDig2 Version 2.16. Department of Ecology and Evolution, Stony Brook University, NY, USA.

  • Rohlf, F. J., & Slice, D. (1990). Extensions of the Procrustes method for the optimal superimposition of landmarks. Systematic Biology, 39(1), 40–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, V. L., & Mercer, J. M. (2000). Morphometrics in development and evolution. American Zoologist, 40(5), 801–810.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slice, D. E. (2007). Geometric morphometrics. Annual Review of Anthropology, 36, 261–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, D. W. (1917). On growth and form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Waddington, C. H. (1970). Towards a theoretical biology. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G. P., & Laubichler, M. D. (2004). Rupert Riedl and the re-synthesis of evolutionary and developmental biology: Body plans and evolvability. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution, 302(1), 92–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zelditch, M. L., Swiderski, D. L., & Sheets, H. D. (2012). A practical companion to geometric morphometrics for biologists: Running analyses in freely-available software. http://booksite.elsevier.com/9780123869036/content/Workbook.pdf.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Alejandro Tablado for his kindly assistance and generous disposition for allowing me to work unrestrictively with the material of the Invertebrate Collection at the Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales (MACN). I acknowledge Guido Pastorino for helpful suggestions and discussions at the beginning of this work, regarding morphological taxonomy issues. Finally, I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers of this manuscript for their thoughtful and constructive suggestions which led to a substantial improvement of this article. This work was supported by a postdoctoral fellowship from the Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instituto Nacional de Investigación de las Ciencias Naturales, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales (MACN), Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Agustín Ostachuk

  2. Centro de Estudios de Historia de la Ciencia y la Técnica José Babini, Universidad Nacional de San Martín (UNSAM), Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Agustín Ostachuk

  3. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina

    Agustín Ostachuk

Authors
  1. Agustín Ostachuk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Agustín Ostachuk.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ostachuk, A. On Novelty, Heterochrony and Developmental Constraints in a Complex Morphological Theory of Recapitulation: The Genus Trophon as a Case Study. Evol Biol 43, 392–406 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-015-9364-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-015-9364-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation