The changing role of the embryo in evolutionary thought: roots of Evo-Devo

By R. Amundson. Heredity, 2006

273 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Astronomy and Astrophysics, History and Philosophy of Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ec9a001b627171f79c77a9a4b33a4661284c5c22

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Astronomy and Astrophysics

1. Douglas H. Erwin
2. Paul E. Griffiths
3. Ingo Brigandt

In History and Philosophy of Science

1. Ingo Brigandt
2. Paul E. Griffiths
3. Douglas H. Erwin
4. Marc Ereshefsky

Citations in the corpus

• DISPARITY: MORPHOLOGICAL PATTERN AND DEVELOPMENTAL CONTEXT (2007, background): “to generate the diversity of form, and this is what Foote is also doing, at least implicitly, in his example. That such theoretical morphospaces are easiest to construct for organisms using accretionary or branching growth accounts for the predominance of studies of molluscs, particularly ammonoids.”
• The importance of homology for biology and philosophy (2007, background): “Pre-Darwinian biologists already possessed fairly reliable criteria of homology, and the homologies between different species which they identified provided critical evidence for the theory of common ancestry (Darwin 1859, Ch. 13; Amundson 2005; Remane 1956; Russell 1916).”
• Beyond Reduction and Pluralism: Toward an Epistemology of Explanatory Integration in Biology (2010, background): “As far as evo-devo is concerned, it is still open whether traditional neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory and evodevo’s developmental approach to evolution can be reconciled and effectively integrated (Amundson, 2005; Wagner, 2007a).”