Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Type: Articles
Published: 2011-08-03
Page range: 67–68
Abstract views: 29
PDF downloaded: 1

Homoplasy: from detecting pattern to determining process in evolution, but with a secondary role for morphology?

Departamento de Botânica, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31270-901, Brazil
Departamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo, Rua do Matão, Trav. 14, no. 101, São Paulo, SP, 05508-900, Brazil
College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, International Institute for Species Exploration, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85287, U.S.A
General Homoplasy

Abstract

David Wake and colleagues provided a thought-provoking review of the concept of homoplasy through the integration, within a phylogenetic framework, of genetic and developmental data (Wake et al. 2011). According to them (p. 1032) “Molecular sequence data have greatly increased our ability to identify homoplastic traits.” This is made clear, for example, in their flow chart for homoplasy detection (Figure 2, p. 1034), wherein homoplasy is discovered through the mapping of “traits of interest” onto a phylogram, a practice common in the molecular phylogenetic paradigm. The “mapping” is usually of morphological characters that are employed to support the chosen (molecular) topology, but which, as a consequence, do not themselves contribute to the formation of those topologies (Assis & Carvalho 2010).

References

  1. Assis, L.C.S. & Carvalho, M.R. de (2010) Key innovations: further remarks on the importance of morphology in elucidating systematic relationships and adaptive radiations. Evolutionary Biology 37, 247–254.

    Bybee, S.M., Zaspel, J.M., Beucke, K.A., Scott, C.H., Smith, B.W. & Branham, M.A. (2009) Are molecular data supplanting morphological data in modern phylogenetic studies? Systematic Entomology 35, 2–5.

    Holland, P.W.H. (2004) The fall and rise of evolutionary developmental biology. In: Williams, D. M. & Forey, P. L. (Eds.), Milestones in Systematics, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 261–275.

    Laubichler, M.D. (2000) Homology in development and the development of homology concept. American Zoologist 40, 777–788.

    Nelson, G. (2004) Cladistics: its arrested development. In: Williams, D.M. & Forey, P.L. (Eds.), Milestones in Systematics, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 127–147.

    Rieppel, O. (2004) What happens when the language of science threatens to break down in systematics: a Popperian perspective. In: Williams, D. M. & Forey, P. L. (Eds.), Milestones in Systematics, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 57–98.

    Wake, D.B., Wake, M.H. & Specht, C.D. (2011) Homoplasy: from detecting pattern to determining process and mechanisms of evolution. Science, 331, 1031–1035.

    West-Eberhard, M.J. (2003) Developmental Plasticity and Evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 794 pp.

    Wheeler, Q.D. (2008) Undisciplined thinking: morphology and Hennig’s unfinished revolution. Systematic Entomology 33, 2–7.