Is Heterochrony Still an Effective Paradigm for Contemporary Studies of Evo-devo?

14Citations
Citations of this article
31Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Heterochrony, or change in the relative timing of developmental events, has been a dominant concept in the study of the relation between evolution and development since even before the term was coined in the mid-nineteenth century. Its popularity exploded beginning in the late 1970s and 1980s as part of the resurgence of interest in Evo-devo that also began at that time, and reflecting a basic premise that heterochronic analysis is indispensible to a meaningful understanding and explanation of morphological diversification. Yet the gradual recognition that the molecular and developmental mechanisms that underlie morphological evolution may be understood more effectively in terms of other processes has increasingly qualified the universality of heterochrony as an explanatory tool. Consequently, while heterochrony still has an important role to play in contemporary studies of Evo-devo, it is not an all-encompassing and exclusive role. Instead, a more nuanced view of heterochrony—as an important paradigm, but not the sole paradigm—provides a more comprehensive depiction and understanding of the developmental basis of evolutionary change.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hanken, J. (2015). Is Heterochrony Still an Effective Paradigm for Contemporary Studies of Evo-devo? In Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science (Vol. 307, pp. 97–110). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9412-1_4

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free