Gignac P M, Santana S E
*Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74107-1898, USA
Department of Biology and Burke Museum of Natural History and Culture, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195-1800, USA.
Integr Comp Biol. 2016 Sep;56(3):369-72. doi: 10.1093/icb/icw080. Epub 2016 Jul 13.
Over the past 40 years of research, two perspectives have dominated the study of ecomorphology at ontogenetic and evolutionary timescales. For key anatomical complexes (e.g., feeding apparatus, locomotor systems, sensory structures), morphological changes during ontogeny are often interpreted in functional terms and linked to their putative importance for fitness. Across larger timescales, morphological transformations in these complexes are examined through character stability or mutability during cladogenesis. Because the fittest organisms must pass through ontogenetic changes in size and shape, addressing transformations in morphology at different time scales, from life histories to macroevolution, has the potential to illuminate major factors contributing to phenotypic diversity. To date, most studies have relied on the assumption that organismal form is tightly constrained by the adult niche. Although this could be accurate for organisms that rapidly reach and spend a substantial portion of their life history at the adult phenotype (e.g., birds, mammals), it may not always hold true for species that experience substantial growth after one or more major fitness filters during their ontogeny (e.g., some fishes, reptiles). In such circumstances, examining the adult phenotype as the primary result of selective processes may be erroneous as it likely obscures the developmental configuration of morphology that was most critical to early survival. Given this discrepancy-and its potential to mislead interpretations of how selection may shape a taxon's phenotype-this symposium addresses the question: how do we identify such ontogenetic "inertia," and how do we integrate developmental information into our phylogenetic, ecological, and functional interpretations of complex phenotypes?
在过去40年的研究中，有两种观点主导了个体发育和进化时间尺度上的生态形态学研究。对于关键的解剖复合体（如摄食器官、运动系统、感觉结构），个体发育过程中的形态变化通常从功能角度进行解释，并与它们对适应性的假定重要性联系起来。在更大的时间尺度上，这些复合体的形态转变通过分支发生过程中的性状稳定性或变异性来研究。由于最适应环境的生物体必须经历大小和形状的个体发育变化，研究从生命史到宏观进化等不同时间尺度上的形态转变，有可能揭示导致表型多样性的主要因素。迄今为止，大多数研究都依赖于这样一种假设，即生物体的形态受到成年生态位的严格限制。虽然这对于那些迅速达到成年表型并在其生命史的很大一部分时间里保持该表型的生物体（如鸟类、哺乳动物）可能是准确的，但对于那些在个体发育过程中经过一个或多个主要适应性筛选后仍经历显著生长的物种（如一些鱼类、爬行动物），这可能并不总是成立。在这种情况下，将成年表型视为选择过程的主要结果可能是错误的，因为这可能掩盖了对早期生存最为关键的形态发育构型。鉴于这种差异及其可能误导对选择如何塑造一个分类单元表型的解释，本次研讨会探讨了以下问题：我们如何识别这种个体发育的“惯性”，以及我们如何将发育信息整合到对复杂表型的系统发育、生态和功能解释中？
