On the Nature of Organs and Organ Systems – A Chapter in the History and Philosophy of Biology

Contrasting definitions of organs based either on function or on strictly morphological criteria are the legacy of a tradition starting with Aristotle. This floating characterization of organs in terms of both form and function extends also to organ systems. The first section of this review outlines...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Alessandro Minelli
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/45629a089bd84402adba3a0d98547e1a
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:45629a089bd84402adba3a0d98547e1a
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:45629a089bd84402adba3a0d98547e1a2021-12-03T07:19:04ZOn the Nature of Organs and Organ Systems – A Chapter in the History and Philosophy of Biology2296-701X10.3389/fevo.2021.745564https://doaj.org/article/45629a089bd84402adba3a0d98547e1a2021-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fevo.2021.745564/fullhttps://doaj.org/toc/2296-701XContrasting definitions of organs based either on function or on strictly morphological criteria are the legacy of a tradition starting with Aristotle. This floating characterization of organs in terms of both form and function extends also to organ systems. The first section of this review outlines the notions of organ and body part as defined, explicitly or implicitly, in representative works of nineteenth century’s comparative morphology. The lack of a clear distinction between the two notions led to problems in Owen’s approach to the comparative method (definition of homolog vs. nature of the vertebrate archetype) and to a paradoxical formulation, by Anton Dohrn, of the principle of functional change. Starting from the second half of the twentieth century, with the extensive use of morphological data in phylogenetic analyses, both terms – organ and body part – have been often set aside, to leave room for a comparison between variously characterized attributes (character states) of the taxa to be compared. Throughout the last two centuries, there have been also efforts to characterize organs or body parts in terms of the underlying developmental dynamics, both in the context of classical descriptive embryology and according to models suggested by developmental genetics. Functionally defined organ are occasionally co-extensive with morphologically defined body parts, nevertheless a clear distinction between the former and the latter is a necessary prerequisite to a study of their evolution: this issue is discussed here on the example of the evolution of hermaphroditism and gonad structure and function.Alessandro MinelliFrontiers Media S.A.articleorganbody partorgan systemDohrnOwenhermaphroditismEvolutionQH359-425EcologyQH540-549.5ENFrontiers in Ecology and Evolution, Vol 9 (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic organ
body part
organ system
Dohrn
Owen
hermaphroditism
Evolution
QH359-425
Ecology
QH540-549.5
spellingShingle organ
body part
organ system
Dohrn
Owen
hermaphroditism
Evolution
QH359-425
Ecology
QH540-549.5
Alessandro Minelli
On the Nature of Organs and Organ Systems – A Chapter in the History and Philosophy of Biology
description Contrasting definitions of organs based either on function or on strictly morphological criteria are the legacy of a tradition starting with Aristotle. This floating characterization of organs in terms of both form and function extends also to organ systems. The first section of this review outlines the notions of organ and body part as defined, explicitly or implicitly, in representative works of nineteenth century’s comparative morphology. The lack of a clear distinction between the two notions led to problems in Owen’s approach to the comparative method (definition of homolog vs. nature of the vertebrate archetype) and to a paradoxical formulation, by Anton Dohrn, of the principle of functional change. Starting from the second half of the twentieth century, with the extensive use of morphological data in phylogenetic analyses, both terms – organ and body part – have been often set aside, to leave room for a comparison between variously characterized attributes (character states) of the taxa to be compared. Throughout the last two centuries, there have been also efforts to characterize organs or body parts in terms of the underlying developmental dynamics, both in the context of classical descriptive embryology and according to models suggested by developmental genetics. Functionally defined organ are occasionally co-extensive with morphologically defined body parts, nevertheless a clear distinction between the former and the latter is a necessary prerequisite to a study of their evolution: this issue is discussed here on the example of the evolution of hermaphroditism and gonad structure and function.
format article
author Alessandro Minelli
author_facet Alessandro Minelli
author_sort Alessandro Minelli
title On the Nature of Organs and Organ Systems – A Chapter in the History and Philosophy of Biology
title_short On the Nature of Organs and Organ Systems – A Chapter in the History and Philosophy of Biology
title_full On the Nature of Organs and Organ Systems – A Chapter in the History and Philosophy of Biology
title_fullStr On the Nature of Organs and Organ Systems – A Chapter in the History and Philosophy of Biology
title_full_unstemmed On the Nature of Organs and Organ Systems – A Chapter in the History and Philosophy of Biology
title_sort on the nature of organs and organ systems – a chapter in the history and philosophy of biology
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/45629a089bd84402adba3a0d98547e1a
work_keys_str_mv AT alessandrominelli onthenatureoforgansandorgansystemsachapterinthehistoryandphilosophyofbiology
_version_ 1718373806992523264