Concepts and methods in ecomorphology

Bock, Walter J.

doi:10.1007/bf02703177

Cited by 67 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although, they have been studied from multiple perspectives, current psittaciform taxonomy requires revision (Wright et al, 2008). Comparative gross myological information may serve as a basis for phylogenetics and systematics at various taxonomic levels (Vanden Berge, 1970;Raikow, 1987Raikow, , 1994McKitrick, 1991) as well as for studying the functional morphology of locomotion (Bock, 1994;Liem et al, 2001). Several studies have been performed in avian hindlimb myology (e.g., Hudson, 1937;Berger, 1960;Owre, 1967;Berman and Raikow, 1982;Raikow, 1985;Smith et al, 2006;Picasso et al, 2012;Zhang et al, 2012;Mosto et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hindlimb myology of the monk parakeet (Aves, Psittaciformes)

Carril

Mosto

Picasso

et al. 2014

Journal of Morphology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We studied the hindlimb myology of the monk parakeet (Myiopsitta monachus). Like all parrots, it has zygodactyl feet enabling perching, climbing, hanging, moving easily among trees, and handling food. Muscles were described and weighed, and physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA) of four flexors and one extensor was calculated. In comparison to other muscles, the M. tibialis cranialis and the M. fibularis brevis show increased development and high PCSA values, and therefore, large potential force production. Also, a large proportion of muscle mass was involved in flexing the digits. We hypothesize that these muscle traits are associated with the arboreal locomotion and food manipulation habits. In the monk parakeet, the M. extensor digitorum longus sends a branch to the hallux, and the connection between the M. flexor digitorum longus and the M. flexor hallucis longus is type I (Gadow's classification). We reaffirm the presence of the M. ambiens as a plesiomorphic condition that disappears in most members of the order. Among Psittaciformes, the M. fibularis brevis is stronger and the M. fibularis weaker in arboreal species than in basal terrestrial ones (e.g., Strigops).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hindlimb myology of the monk parakeet (Aves, Psittaciformes)

Carril

Mosto

Picasso

et al. 2014

Journal of Morphology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the latter term has two meanings. One of them is connected with the study of the meronomic aspect of the diversity of organisms: W. Bock [132] defined its main task as an analysis of morphological adaptations as such. Another is taxonomic meaning: it is associated with the classification of organisms according to their eco-(or bio-) morphological similarities (references above).…”

Section: The Biomorphic Programmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiplicity of Research Programs in the Biological Systematics: a Case for Scientific Pluralism

Pavlinov¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological diversity (BD) explored by the biological systematics is a complexly organized natural phenomenon and can be partitioned in several aspects defined with references to various causal factors structuring biota. These BD aspects are studied by particular research programs based on specific taxonomic theories (TT). They provide in total a framework for comprehending the structure of the biological systematics and its multi-aspect relations to other fields of biology. General principles of individualizing BD aspects and construing TT as quasi-axiomatics are briefly considered. It stressed that each TT is characterized by a specific combination of interrelated ontological and epistemological premises most adequate to the BD aspect a TT deals with. The following contemporary research programs in systematics are recognized and characterized in brief: phenetic, rational (with several subprograms), numerical, typological (with several subprograms), biosystematic, biomorphic, phylogenetic (with several subprograms), evo-devo. From a scientific pluralism perspective, all these research programs related to particular naturally defined BD aspects are of the same biological and scientific significance and no one of them can pretend to take a privileged position. They elaborate "locally" natural classifications that can be united by a kind of generalized faceted classification.

show abstract

“…As a broader concept, ecomorphology encompasses all, or part, of a two-way process: the relationship between morphological and ecological patterns of variation (Winkler, 1988;Bock, 1994;Reilly & Wainwright, 1994). This includes the question of how organism form reflects adaptation to a specific environmental context (i.e.…”

Section: An Ecomorphological Framework For Primate Originsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the step from levels 3-4, differences between neoand palaeo-ecomorphological studies become pronounced. Strictly, ecomorphology requires observation of organisms in their natural environment (Bock, 1994). Continuing with the example of a claw-bearing mammal, there are many possible reasons why it might not climb trees despite its claws.…”

Section: An Ecomorphological Framework For Primate Originsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contextualising primate origins – an ecomorphological framework

Soligo

Smaers

2016

Journal of Anatomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecomorphology -the characterisation of the adaptive relationship between an organism's morphology and its ecological role -has long been central to theories of the origin and early evolution of the primate order. This is exemplified by two of the most influential theories of primate origins: Matt Cartmill's Visual Predation Hypothesis, and Bob Sussman's Angiosperm Co-Evolution Hypothesis. However, the study of primate origins is constrained by the absence of data directly documenting the events under investigation, and has to rely instead on a fragmentary fossil record and the methodological assumptions inherent in phylogenetic comparative analyses of extant species. These constraints introduce particular challenges for inferring the ecomorphology of primate origins, as morphology and environmental context must first be inferred before the relationship between the two can be considered. Fossils can be integrated in comparative analyses and observations of extant model species and laboratory experiments of form-function relationships are critical for the functional interpretation of the morphology of extinct species. Recent developments have led to important advancements, including phylogenetic comparative methods based on more realistic models of evolution, and improved methods for the inference of clade divergence times, as well as an improved fossil record. This contribution will review current perspectives on the origin and early evolution of primates, paying particular attention to their phylogenetic (including cladistic relationships and character evolution) and environmental (including chronology, geography, and physical environments) contextualisation, before attempting an up-todate ecomorphological synthesis of primate origins.

show abstract

Concepts and methods in ecomorphology

Cited by 67 publications

References 33 publications

Hindlimb myology of the monk parakeet (Aves, Psittaciformes)

Hindlimb myology of the monk parakeet (Aves, Psittaciformes)

Multiplicity of Research Programs in the Biological Systematics: a Case for Scientific Pluralism

Contextualising primate origins – an ecomorphological framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About