Evolutionarily Stable Configurations: Functional Integration and the Evolution of Phenotypic Stability

Wagner, Günter P.; Schwenk, Kurt

doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-4185-1_4

Cited by 123 publications

(126 citation statements)

References 95 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

121

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These pressures would be expected to lead to the abandonment of this feeding mode. They conclude that internal selectionF which we see as a form of constraintFmay account for the unexpected persistence of the lingual feeding phenotype (Wagner and Schwenk, 2000).…”

Section: Constraints In a Phylogenetic Contextmentioning

confidence: 65%

“…Whyte defines 'internal selection' as: 'the internal selection of mutants at molecular, chromosomal, and cellular levels, in accordance with their compatibility with the internal coordination of the organism' (Whyte,'65: p. vii). Wagner and Schwenk (2000) discuss this concept in relation to 'evolutionarily stable configurations' (ESC)Fcharacters within the organism that show strong integration, in the sense that they function as a unit. One example they give is of the incisor teeth in gnawing rodents: there is strong selection for the upper and lower teeth to fit together accurately in order to carry out their 'proper function' (i.e., cutting).…”

Section: Generative and Selective Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One example they give is of the incisor teeth in gnawing rodents: there is strong selection for the upper and lower teeth to fit together accurately in order to carry out their 'proper function' (i.e., cutting). Wagner and Schwenk (2000) argue that such integration may overcome external selection pressure on individual characters comprising the ESC. Modularity of the developmental program is a manifestation of the internal co-ordination of embryogenesis that is related to character linkage (Wagner and Altenberg, '96;Galis et al, 2001).…”

Section: Generative and Selective Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An explicitly phylogenetic approach has been used to examine internal constraints on the lingual feeding apparatus in iguanid lizards (Wagner and Schwenk, 2000). The authors found that specific modes of lingual feeding persisted during evolution in the face of presumed changes in external selection pressures.…”

Section: Constraints In a Phylogenetic Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…See also McKitrick ('93) for discussion and review of phylogenetic and other approaches to constraints. There are relatively few examples of the practical use of a phylogenetic framework for analysing constraints (e.g., Wagner and Schwenk, 2000), and so we shall explore it further in this paper.…”

Section: Constraints In a Phylogenetic Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Developmental constraints in a comparative framework: A test case using variations in phalanx number during amniote evolution

Richardson

Chipman

2003

J Exp Zool Pt B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Constraints are factors that limit evolutionary change. A subset of constraints is developmental, and acts during embryonic development. There is some uncertainty about how to define developmental constraints, and how to formulate them as testable hypotheses. Furthermore, concepts such as constraint-breaking, universal constraints, and forbidden morphologies present some conceptual difficulties. One of our aims is to clarify these issues. After briefly reviewing current classifications of constraint, we define developmental constraints as those affecting morphogenetic processes in ontogeny. They may be generative or selective, although a clear distinction cannot always be drawn. We support the idea that statements about constraints are in fact statements about the relative frequency of particular transformations (where 'transformation' indicates a change from the ancestral condition). An important consequence of this is that the same transformation may be constrained in one developmental or phylogenetic context, but evolutionarily plastic in another. In this paper, we analyse developmental constraints within a phylogenetic framework, building on similar work by previous authors. Our approach is based on the following assumptions from the literature: (1) constraints are identified when there is a discrepancy between the observed frequency of a transformation, and its expected frequency; (2) the 'expected' distribution is derived by examining the phylogenetic distribution of the transformation and its associated selection pressures. Thus, by looking for congruence between these various phylogenetic distribution patterns, we can test hypotheses about constraint. We critically examine this approach using a test case: variation in phalanx-number in the amniote limb.

show abstract

Section: Constraints In a Phylogenetic Contextmentioning

confidence: 65%

Section: Generative and Selective Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 99%