Abstract
How much, if anything, morphology contributed to the modern synthesis is partly a matter of how one defines that term. In the strict sense, morphology is a purely formal discipline and had very little to contribute. Morphology may also be considered a kind of data, and when it becomes functional a better case can be made for its role in evolutionary studies. Be that as it may, the incorporation of morphology into the synthesis was a later development. The initial focus was at the populational level, including the problems of speciation, which makes sense because that was where the opportunities seemed to be. As the synthesis evolved and matured it expanded its horizons and incorporated a larger range of topics. Very little discussion of morphology occurs in the canonical writings of the so-called architects. At the time when the synthesis was supposedly complete, which was around 1950, the incorporation of morphology into it was just beginning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bowler, P.J., 1983. The Eclipse of Darwinism: Anti-Darwinian Evolution Theories in the Decades Around 1900. Princeton University Press, Baltimore.
Coleman, W., 1980. Morphology in the evolutionary synthesis. In: Mayr, E., Provine, W. (Eds.), The Evolutionary Synthesis. Harvard Univeristy Press, Cambridge, pp. 174–180.
Darwin, C., 1868. The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication. John Murray, London.
Davis, D.D., 1949. Comparative anatomy and the evolution of vertebrates. In: Jepsen, G.L., Mayr, E., Simpson, G.G. (Eds.), Genetics, Paleontology, and Evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp. 64–89.
Davis, D.D., 1964. The giant panda: a morphological study of evolutionary mechanisms. Fieldiana, Zoology 3, 1–339.
Dobzhansky, Th., 1937. Genetics and the Origin of Species. Columbia University Press, New York. (Ed. 2, 1941, Ed. 3, 1953).
Dobzhansky, Th., 1970. Genetics of the Evolutionary Process. Columbia University Press, New York.
Ghiselin, M.T., 1969. The Triumph of the Darwinian Method. University of California Press, Berkeley.
Ghiselin, M.T., 1975. The rationale of pangenesis. Genetics 79, 47–57.
Ghiselin, M.T., 1980. The failure of morphology to assimilate Darwinism. In: Mayr, E., Provine, W. (Eds.), The Evolutionary Synthesis. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp. 180–193.
Ghiselin, M.T., 1997. Metaphysics and the Origin of Species. State University of New York Press, Albany.
Gould, S.J., 2002. The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Huxley, J.S., 1932. Problems of Relative Growth. London, Methuen.
Huxley, J.S. (Ed.), 1940. The New Systematics. Oxford University Press, London.
Huxley, J.S., 1942. Evolution: The Modern Synthesis. George Allen & Unwin, London.
Jepsen, G.L., Mayr, E., Simpson, G.G. (Eds.), 1949. Genetics, Paleontology, and Evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Just, T., 1949. Aspects of plant morphology and evolution. In: Jepsen, G.L., Mayr, E., Simpson, G.G. (Eds.), Genetics, Paleontology, and Evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp. 90–100.
Laporte, L.F., 2000. George Gaylord Simpson Paleontologist and Evolutionist. Columbia University Press, New York.
Lidicker, W.Z., 2000. An essay on the history of the Biosystematists of the San Francisco Bay Area. In: Ghiselin, M.T., Leviton, A.E. (Eds.), Cultures and Institutions of Natural History: Essays in the History and Philosophy of Science. California Academy of Sciences, San, Francisco, pp. 315–328.
Mayr, E., 1942. Systematics and the Origin of Species. Columbia University Press, New York.
Mayr, E., Linsley, E.G., Usinger, R.L., 1953. Methods and Principles of Systematic Zoology. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Rensch, B., 1939. Typen der Artbildung. Biol. Rev. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 14, 186–222.
Rensch, B., 1947. Neuere Probleme der Abstammungslehre: Die Transspezifische Evolution. Ferdinand Enke Verlag, Stuttgart.
Rensch, B., 1959. Die phylogenetische Abwandlung der Ontogenese. In: Heberer, G. (Ed.), Die Evolution der Organismen: Ergebnisse und Probleme der Abstammungslehre, second ed., vol. 1. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart, pp. 103–130.
Ruse, M., 1996. Monad to Man: The Concept of Progress in Evolutionary Biology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Schmalhausen, I.I., 1946. Factors of Evolution: The Theory of Stabilizing Selection. Akademia Nauk, Leningrad (In Russian).
Schmalhausen, I.I., 1949. Factors of Evolution: The Theory of Stabilizing Selection. Blakiston, Philadelphia.
Sewertzoff, A.N., 1931. Morphologische Gesetzmässigkeiten der Evolution. Verlag von Gustav Fischer, Jena.
Simpson, G.G., 1944. Tempo and Mode in Evolution. Columbia University Press, New York.
Simpson, G.G., 1953. The Major Features of Evolution. Columbia University Press, New York.
Simpson, G.G., Roe, A., 1939. Quantitative Zoology. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Smocovitis, V.B., 1996. Unifying Biology: The Evolutionary Synthesis and Evolutionary Biology. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Stebbins, G.L., 1950. Variation and Evolution in Plants. Columbia University Press, New York.
Stebbins, G.L., 1974. Flowering Plants: Evolution Above the Species Level. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Wake, M.H., 1992. Morphology, the study of form and function, in modern evolutionary biology. Oxford Surveys Evolu. Biol. 8, 288–346.
Waisbren, S.J., 1988. The importance of morphology in the evolutionary synthesis as demonstrated by the contributions of the oxford group: Goodrich, Huxley and de Beer. J. History Biol. 21, 291–330.
Winsor, M.P., 2003. Non-essentialist methods in pre-Darwinian taxonomy. Biol. Philos. 18, 387–400.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ghiselin, M.T. The failure of morphology to contribute to the modern synthesis. Theory Biosci. 124, 309–316 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.thbio.2005.11.001
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.thbio.2005.11.001