David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Acta Biotheoretica 41 (4):391-409 (1993)
This paper examines the middle ear of fossil living animals in terms of the homologies which have been drawn between its parts in different vertebrate groups. Seven homologies are considered: 1, the middle ear cavity/spiracular pouch; 2, the stapes/hyomandibula; 3, the stapedial/hyomandibular processes; 4 the tympanic membrane; 5, the otic notch; 6, the fenestra ovalis; 7, and the stapedial/hyomandibular foramen. The reasons leading to assessments of homology are reviewed. Homologies 1 and 2, based largely on embryological evidence, are fairly robust, though there are arguments about the details. Homologies 3, 4 and 5 stem from ideas about early tetrapod evolution, and were influenced by contingent factors including the order and time of discovery of early fossil taxa, and perceptions of their phylogeny which resulted from this. They were also influenced by ideas of the evolution of terrestriality among tetrapods. Most of the conceptions have been overturned in recent years by new fossil discoveries and new ways of looking at old data. Homology 6 has been little considered. One possible hypothesis, placed in a strictly archetypal theoretical framework has been ignored but deserves consideration on other grounds. Homology 7 depends on how tetrapods are characterised, not a question which has posed difficulties until recently, but which is likely to with the discovery of intermediate fossil forms.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
F. J. K. Soontiëns (1991). Evolution: Teleology or Chance? [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 22 (1):133-141.
Paul E. Griffiths (2007). The Phenomena of Homology. Biology and Philosophy 22 (5):643-658.
Leandro Assis & Ingo Brigandt (2009). Homology: Homeostatic Property Cluster Kinds in Systematics and Evolution. Evolutionary Biology 36:248-255.
Marc Ereshefsky (2009). Homology: Integrating Phylogeny and Development. Biological Theory 4 (3):225-229.
Anne H. Weaver (2002). The Fossil Evidence for Spatial Cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (3):424-425.
Donald Dryden (1999). Human Emotions and Evolutionary Homologies. Metascience 8 (1):25-35.
Todd Grantham (2004). The Role of Fossils in Phylogeny Reconstruction: Why is It so Difficult to Integrate Paleobiological and Neontological Evolutionary Biology? [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 19 (5):687-720.
Elliott Sober (2009). Absence of Evidence and Evidence of Absence: Evidential Transitivity in Connection with Fossils, Fishing, Fine-Tuning, and Firing Squads. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 143 (1):63 - 90.
Emmanuel Gilissen & Thierry Smith (2003). Mesozoic Mammals and Early Mammalian Brain Diversity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (5):556-557.
M. I. Coates (1993). Ancestors and Homology. Acta Biotheoretica 41 (4):411-424.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #272,234 of 1,790,256 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #266,356 of 1,790,256 )
How can I increase my downloads?