Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20865238›Full record

ReviewDie Naturwissenschaften2010

Evolutionary developmental biology: its concepts and history with a focus on Russian and German contributions.

Lennart Olsson, Georgy S Levit, Uwe Hossfeld

Abstract readHistorical ArticleReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Die Naturwissenschaften, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Evolutionary cardiology and experimental research].Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2022
    Article
  2. Article
  3. The Modern Synthesis: Theoretical or Institutional Event?Journal of the history of biology · 2019
    Article
  4. Ernst Haeckel's embryology in biology textbooks in the German Democratic Republic, 1951-1988.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2019
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Russian editions of E. Haeckel's works and the evolution of their perception.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2019
    Article
  7. From Goethe's plant archetype via Haeckel's biogenetic law to plant evo-devo 2016.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2017
    Article
  8. The "Biogenetic Law" in zoology: from Ernst Haeckel's formulation to current approaches.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2017
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Leeches of the genus Helobdella as model organisms for Evo-Devo studies.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2015
    Article
  11. At home among strangers: Alfred Russel Wallace in Russia.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2013
    Article
  12. Heredity, development and evolution: the unmodern synthesis of E.S. Russell.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2013
    Article
  13. Article
  14. The phylotypic stage as a boundary of modular memory: non mechanistic perspective.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2012
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Walter Garstang: a retrospective.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2011
    Article
  17. Article
  18. On the evolution of development.Trends in developmental biology
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Lennart OlssonInstitut für Spezielle Zoologie und Evolutionsbiologie mit Phyletischem Museum, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, Erbertstr. 1, 07743, Jena, Germany. Lennart.Olsson@uni-jena.de
Georgy S Levit
Uwe Hossfeld
Friedrich Schiller University Jena · DESchiller International University · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evolutionary theory has been likened to a "universal acid" (Dennett 1995) that eats its way into more and more areas of science. Recently, developmental biology has been infused by evolutionary concepts and perspectives, and a new field of research--evolutionary developmental biology--has been created and is often called EvoDevo for short. However, this is not the first attempt to make a synthesis between these two areas of biology. In contrast, beginning right after the publication of Darwin's Origin in 1859, Ernst Haeckel formulated his biogenetic law in 1872, famously stating that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. Haeckel was in his turn influenced by pre-Darwinian thinkers such as Karl Ernst von Baer, who had noted that earlier developmental stages show similarities not seen in the adults. In this review, written for an audience of non-specialists, we first give an overview of the history of EvoDevo, especially the tradition emanating from Haeckel and other comparative embryologists and morphologists, which has often been neglected in discussions about the history of EvoDevo and evolutionary biology. Here we emphasize contributions from Russian and German scientists to compensate for the Anglo-American bias in the literature. In Germany, the direct influence of Ernst Haeckel was felt particularly in Jena, where he spent his entire career as a professor, and we give an overview of the "Jena school" of evolutionary morphology, with protagonists such as Oscar Hertwig, Ludwig Plate, and Victor Franz, who all developed ideas that we would nowadays think of as belonging to EvoDevo. Franz ideas about "biometabolic modi" are similar to those of a Russian comparative morphologist that visited Jena repeatedly, A. N. Sewertzoff, who made important contributions to what we now call heterochrony research--heterochrony meaning changes in the relative timing of developmental events. His student I. I. Schmalhausen became an important contributor to the synthetic theory of evolution in Russia and is only partly known outside of the Russian-reading world because only one of his many books was translated into English early on. He made many important contributions to evolutionary theory and we point out the important parallels between Schmalhausen's ideas (stabilizing selection, autonomization) and C. H. Waddington's (canalization, genetic assimilation). This is one of the many parallels that have contributed to an increased appreciation of the internationality of progress in evolutionary thinking in the first half of the twentieth century. A direct link between German and Russian evolutionary biology is provided by N. V. Timoféeff-Ressovsky, whose work on, e.g., fly genetics in Berlin is a crucial part of the history of evo-devo. To emphasize the international nature of heterochrony research as predecessor to the modern era of EvoDevo, we include Sir G. R. de Beer's work in the UK. This historical part is followed by a short review of the discovery and importance of homeobox genes and of some of the major concepts that form the core of modern EvoDevo, such as modularity, constraints, and evolutionary novelties. Major trends in contemporary EvoDevo are then outlined, such as increased use of genomics and molecular genetics, computational and bioinformatics approaches, ecological developmental biology (eco-devo), and phylogenetically informed comparative embryology. Based on our survey, we end the review with an outlook on future trends and important issues in EvoDevo.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionAnimalsDevelopmental BiologyEmbryonic DevelopmentGeneticsGermanyHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th CenturyRussia

Identifiers

PMID20865238
OpenAlexW2020577798

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.