Models and Tests in Functional Morphology: The Significance of Description and Integration

SYNOPSIS: Functional-anatomical work on complex structural systems is handicapped by several difficulties: (1) Lack of established guidelines on how to select the structures that are relevant for the intended study, (2) lack of methods to check the accuracy of the description of a system's morphology, and (3) the need to integrate a large mass of results obtained through a variety of approaches taken from different disciplines, such as anatomy, physiology, physics, biochemistry, ecology and evolutionary biology. Suggestions to alleviate some of the problems include (1) to use information on the physiological and physical properties of the tissues in a system and on biomechanical principles governing the interactions among these tissues to help in the selection and checking process necessary during the morphological description, (2) to construct a structural model of the system by condensing the morphological description, (3) to construct a functional model on the basisof the structural model by using physiological, physical and biomechanical principles that govern the functioning and interactions of the tissues and elements of the system, and (4) to test the functional model through independent observations, experiments or natural experiments ( i.e. , individual variations).

[1]  D. Wake,et al.  Tongue evolution in the lungless salamanders, family plethodontidae I. Introduction, theory and a general model of dynamics , 1976, Journal of morphology.

[2]  H. Kacser,et al.  Kinetic models of development and heredity. , 1960, Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology.

[3]  G. Zweers The feeding system of the pigeon (Columba livia L.). , 1982, Advances in anatomy, embryology, and cell biology.

[4]  D. Wake,et al.  Tongue evolution in the lungless salamanders, family plethodontidae. II. Function and evolutionary diversity , 1977 .

[5]  W. Bock The Definition and Recognition of Biological Adaptation , 1980 .

[6]  W. Bock,et al.  ADAPTATION AND THE FORM–FUNCTION COMPLEX , 1965 .

[7]  Peter Charles Goody,et al.  Major Patterns in Vertebrate Evolution. , 1978 .

[8]  Thomas A. McMahon,et al.  Muscles, Reflexes, and Locomotion , 1984 .

[9]  K. Liem Adaptive Significance of Intra- and Interspecific Differences in the Feeding Repertoires of Cichlid Fishes , 1980 .

[10]  J. Basmajian Electromyography--dynamic gross anatomy: a review. , 1980, The American journal of anatomy.

[11]  P. Dullemeijer,et al.  Concepts and approaches in animal morphology , 1974 .

[12]  W. F. Gutmann Phylogenetic Reconstruction: Theory, Methodology, and Application to Chordate Evolution , 1977 .

[13]  H. Devries MUSCLES ALIVE-THEIR FUNCTIONS REVEALED BY ELECTROMYOGRAPHY , 1976 .

[14]  D. Wake,et al.  Tongue evolution in lungless salamanders, family plethodontidae. III. Patterns of peripheral innervation , 1983, Journal of morphology.

[15]  W. Kenchington Animal mechanics , 1950, Nature.

[16]  V. Tucker The energetic cost of moving about. , 1975, American Scientist.

[17]  H. Shaffer,et al.  Functional morphology of the feeding mechanism in aquatic ambystomatid salamanders , 1985, Journal of morphology.

[18]  J. Beament Physical models in biology. , 1960, Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology.

[19]  S MOLBECH,et al.  ON THE PARADOXIDAL EFFECT OF SOME TWO-JOINT MUSCLES. , 1965, Acta morphologica Neerlando-Scandinavica.