Moss M L
Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997 Oct;112(4):410-7. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(97)70049-0.
In two interrelated articles, the current revision of the functional matrix hypothesis extends to a reconsideration of the relative roles of genomic and of epigenetic processes and mechanisms in the regulation (control, causation) of craniofacial growth and development. The dialectical method was chosen to analyze this matter, because it explicitly provides for the fuller presentation of a genomic thesis, an epigenetic antithesis, and a resolving synthesis. The later two are presented here, where the synthesis suggests that both genomic and epigenetic factors are necessary causes, that neither alone is also a sufficient cause, and that only the two, interacting together, furnish both the necessary and sufficient cause(s) of ontogenesis. This article also provides a comprehensive bibliography that introduces the several new, and still evolving, disciplines that may provide alternative viewpoints capable of resolving this continuing controversy; repetition of the present theoretical bases for the arguments on both sides of these questions seems nonproductive. In their place, it is suggested that the group of disciplines, broadly termed Complexity, would most likely amply repay deeper consideration and application in the study of ontogenesis.
在两篇相互关联的文章中，功能基质假说的当前修订版延伸至对基因组和表观遗传过程及机制在颅面生长发育调控（控制、因果关系）中相对作用的重新思考。选择辩证方法来分析这个问题，因为它明确提供了对基因组论点、表观遗传反论点以及解决性综合的更全面呈现。后两者在此呈现，综合表明基因组和表观遗传因素都是必要原因，单独任何一个都不是充分原因，只有两者共同相互作用，才构成个体发育的必要且充分原因。本文还提供了一份综合参考文献，介绍了几个新的且仍在不断发展的学科，这些学科可能提供能够解决这一持续争议的不同观点；重复关于这些问题双方论点的当前理论基础似乎没有成效。取而代之的是，有人建议，广义上称为复杂性的学科群很可能在个体发育研究中给予更深入的思考和应用丰厚回报。
