Skip to main content
Log in

Functional Complexity in Organisms: Parts as Proxies

  • Published:
Biology and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The functional complexity, or the number of functions, of organisms hasfigured prominently in certain theoretical and empirical work inevolutionary biology. Large-scale trends in functional complexity andcorrelations between functional complexity and other variables, such assize, have been proposed. However, the notion of number of functions hasalso been operationally intractable, in that no method has been developedfor counting functions in an organism in a systematic and reliable way.Thus, studies have had to rely on the largely unsupported assumption thatnumber of functions can be measured indirectly, by using number ofmorphological, physiological, and behavioral “parts” as a proxy. Here, amodel is developed that supports this assumption. Specifically, the modelpredicts that few parts will have many functions overlapping in them, andtherefore the variance in number of functions per part will be low. If so,then number of parts is expected to be well correlated with number offunctions, and we can use part counts as proxies for function counts incomparative studies of organisms, even when part counts are low. Alsodiscussed briefly is a strategy for identifying certain kinds of parts inorganisms in a systematic way.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amundson, R. and Lauder, G.V.: 1994, ‘Function without Purpose: The Uses of Causal Role Function in Evolutionary Biology’, Biology and Philosophy 9, 443–469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, P.H. et al. (eds): 1987, Charles Darwin's Notebooks, Notebook E, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, G. and Mooers, A.O.: 1997, ‘Size and Complexity Among Multicellular Organisms’, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 60, 345–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonner, J.T.: 1988, The Evolution of Complexity, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandon, R.N.: 1996, ‘The Levels of Selection’, in R.N. Brandon (ed.), Concepts and Methods in Evolutionary Biology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 58–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandon, R.N.: 1999, ‘The Units of Selection Revisited: The Modules of Selection’, Biology and Philosophy 14, 167–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandon, R.N.: In press, ‘La Téléologie dans les Systèmes à l'Organisation Naturelle’, in B. Feltz, M. Crommelinck and P. Goujon (eds), Auto-organisation et Emergence dans les Sciences de la Vie, OUSIA, Bruxelles.

  • Buss, L.W.: 1987, The Evolution of Individuality, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D.T.: 1958, ‘Common Fate, Similarity, and Other Indices of the Status of Aggregates of Persons as Social Entities’, Behavioral Sciences 3, 14–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaitin, G.J.: 1975, ‘Randomness and Mathematical Proof’, Scientific American 232, 47–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheverud, J.M.: 1996, ‘Developmental Integration and the Evolution of Pleiotropy’, American Zoologist 36, 44–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cisne, J.L.: 1974, ‘Evolution of the World Fauna of Aquatic Free-Living Arthropods’, Evolution 28, 337–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, B.J.: 1985, ‘Size and Behavior in Ants: Constraints on Complexity’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 82, 8548–8551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crutchfield, J.P. and Young, K.: 1989, ‘Inferring Statistical Complexity’, Physical Review Letters 63, 105–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Queiroz, A. and Wimberger, P.H.: 1993, ‘The Usefulness of Behavior for Phylogeny Estimation: Levels of Homoplasy in Behavioral and Morphological Characters’, Evolution 47, 46–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friel, J.P. and Wainwright, P.C.: 1998, ‘Evolution of Motor Patterns in Tetraodontiform Fishes: Does Muscle Duplication Lead to Functional Diversification’, Brain, Behavior, and Evolution 52, 159–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gingerich, P.D.: 1984, ‘Mammalian Diversity and Structure’, in P.D. Gingerich and C.E. Badgley (eds), Mammals: Notes for a Short Course, Paleontological Society Short Course Notes, Vol. 8 (T. W. Broadhead, series ed.), University of Tennessee Studies in Geology, 8, 1–16.

  • Godfrey-Smith, P.: 1996, Complexity and the Function of Mind in Nature, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heylighen, F.: In press, ‘The Growth of Structural and Functional Complexity during Evolution’, in F. Heylighen and D. Aerts (eds), Evolution of Complexity, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.

  • Hughes, D.J. and Jackson, J.B.C.: 1990, ‘Do Constant Environments Promote Complexity of Form?: The Distribution of Bryozoan Polymorphism as a Test of Hypotheses’, Evolution 44, 889–905.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D.L.: 1980, ‘Individuality and Selection’, Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 11, 311–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S.A.: 1993, The Origins of Order, Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamarck, J.B.P.A.M.: 1809/1984, Zoological Philosophy, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauder, G.V.: 1981, ‘Form and Function: Structural Analysis in Evolutionary Morphology’, Paleobiology 7, 430–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levins, R.: 1968, Evolution in Changing Environments, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levins, R.: 1973, ‘Complex Systems’, in C.H. Waddington (ed.), Towards a Theoretical Biology, Volume 3, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 73–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • McShea, D.W.: 1991, ‘Complexity and Evolution: What Everybody Knows’, Biology and Philosophy 6, 303–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • McShea, D.W.: 1993, ‘Evolutionary Change in the Morphological Complexity of the Mammalian Vertebral Column’, Evolution 47, 730–740.

    Google Scholar 

  • McShea, D.W.: 1996, ‘Metazoan Complexity and Evolution: Is There a Trend?’, Evolution 50, 477–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • McShea, D.W.: In press, ‘Parts and Integration: Consequences of Hierarchy’, in F.K. McKinney, S. Lidgard and J.B.C. Jackson (eds), Process from Pattern in the Fossil Record, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

  • McShea, D.W. and Venit, E.P.: In press, ‘What Is a Part?’, in G.P. Wagner (ed.), Evolutionary Biology and Characters, Academic Press, San Diego.

  • Mishler, B.D. and Brandon, R.N.: 1987, ‘Individuality, Pluralism, and the Phylogenetic Species Concept’, Biology and Philosophy 2, 397-414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mittenthal, J.E., Baskin, A.B. and Reinke, R.E.: 1992, ‘Patterns of Structure and their Evolution in the Organization of Organisms: Modules, Matching, and Compaction’, in J. Mittenthal and A. Baskin (eds), Principles of Organization in Organisms, Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity, Proceedings, Volume XIII. Addison-Wesley, pp. 321–332.

  • Neander, K.: 1991, ‘Functions as Selected Effects: the Conceptual Analyst's Defense’, Philosophy of Science 58, 168–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, E. and Miller, R.: 1958, Morphological Integration, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oster, G.F. and Wilson, E.O.: 1978, Caste and Ecology in the Social Insects, Princeton University Press, Princeton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raff, R.A.: 1996, The Shape of Life, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, V.L.: 1991, ‘Homology and Hierarchies: Problems Solved and Unresolved’, Journal of Evolutionary Biology 4, 167–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salthe, S.N.: 1985, Evolving Hierarchical Systems, Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salthe, S.N. 1993: Development and Evolution, MIT Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, P.T. and Ho, M.W.: 1976, ‘On the Increase in Complexity in Evolution’, Journal of Theoretical Biology 63, 375–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, P.T. and Ho, M.W.: 1981, ‘On the Increase in Complexity in Evolution II: The Relativity of Complexity and the Principle of Minimum Increase’, Journal of Theoretical Biology 90, 515–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, W.B. and Work, D.M.: 1997, ‘Evolution of Shell Morphology and Suture Complexity in Paleozoic Prolecanitids, the Rootstock of Mesozoic Ammonoids’, Paleobiology 23, 301–325.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schopf, T.J.M.: 1973, ‘Ergonomics of Polymorphism: Its Relation to the Colony as the Unit of Natural Selection in Species of the Phylum Ectoprocta’, in R.S. Boardman, A.H. Cheetham and W.A. Oliver (eds), Animal Colonies: Development and Function through Time, Dowden, Hutchinson, & Ross, Stroudsburg, PA, pp. 247–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schopf, T.J.M., Raup, D.M., Gould, S.J. and Simberloff, D.S.: 1975, ‘Genomic Versus Morphologic Rates of Evolution: Influence of Morphologic Complexity’, Paleobiology 1, 63–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A.: 1969, ‘The Architecture of Complexity’, in H.A. Simon (ed.), The Sciences of the Artificial, MIT Press, Cambridge, pp. 84–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentine, J.W., Collins, A.G. and Meyer, C.P.: 1993, ‘Morphological Complexity Increase in Metazoans’, Paleobiology 20, 131–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddington, C.H.: 1969, ‘Paradigm for an Evolutionary Process’, in C.H. Waddington (ed.), Towards a Theoretical Biology, Volume 2, Aldine, Chicago, pp. 106–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G.P.: 1996, ‘Homologues, Natural Kinds and Evolution of Modularity’, American Zoologist 36, 36–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G.P. and Altenberg, L.: 1996, ‘Complex Adaptations and Evolution of Evolvability’, Evolution 50, 967–976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E.O.: 1968, ‘The Ergonomics of Caste in the Social insects’, American Naturalist 102, 41–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D.S. and Sober, E.: 1994, ‘Reintroducing Group Selection to the Human Behavioral Sciences’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17, 585–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimsatt, W.C.: 1974, ‘Complexity and Organization’, in K.F. Schaffner and R.S. Cohen (eds), Philosophy of Science Association 1972, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, pp. 67–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wimsatt, W.C.: 1994, ‘The Ontology of Complex Systems’, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 20 (Supplement), 207–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelditch, M.L.: 1996, ‘Introduction to the Symposium: Historical Patterns of Developmental Integration’, American Zoologist 36, 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McShea, D.W. Functional Complexity in Organisms: Parts as Proxies. Biology & Philosophy 15, 641–668 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006695908715

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006695908715

Navigation