ArticleScientific reports2023
Homology judgements of pre-evolutionary naturalists explained by general human shape matching abilities.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fundamentals of Plant Morphology and Plant Evo-Devo (Evolutionary Developmental Morphology).Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many biological homologies were discovered before Darwin and without agreed criteria. Paradigmatic examples include the phylogenetic homology of mammalian forelimb bones and the serial homology of floral organs in waterlilies. It is generally assumed that perceiving similarities intuitively was the first step towards establishing morphological homologies. However, this assumption has never been tested. We hypothesize that pre-evolutionary naturalists relied on the well-established ability of humans to find visual correspondences between differently shaped objects. By using images of homologous organs and applying an experimental paradigm from cognitive psychology, we found that (1) naïve participants utilised this ability when identifying "corresponding" locations. In addition, (2) these locations were statistically indistinguishable from the locations that pre-evolutionary naturalists and contemporary experts considered homologous. Furthermore, (3) presenting naïve participants with images of intermediate organs influenced their correspondence judgements. This influence was in line with historical reports according to which intermediate organs facilitated the pre-evolutionary recognition of homologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.