Advertisement

Behavior plus “Pathology” — the Origin of Adaptations?

  • Dieter Stefan Peters

Summary

The relationship of construction and behavior in the evolutionary process is discussed on the basis of comparison of malformed bills of avian species with the normal, but specialized bills of other species. The following insights emerged:
  1. 1.

    1. Construction and behavior can be evaluated only on the foundation of their interactions.

     
  2. 2.

    Construction and behavior can vary independently from each other within certain limits.

     
  3. 3.

    As a rule, behavior seems to act as a selective force on the variants of the construction. This means that the organism produces an own canalizing (selective) factor in addition to, and reaching beyond the canalizing limitations of the mere constructional constraints of its coherent system.

     
  4. 4.

    Through its behavior the organism involves parts of the environment in its activities. The concept of adaptation is meaningful only in this context.

     
  5. 5.

    The environment cannot bring about organismic variations; the environment is not creative, it can only eradicate.

     
  6. 6.

    The insight that behavior channels construction can be helpful in attempts to reconstruct the evolutionary process, even if it sometimes helps only to understand why a certain reconstruction cannot be achieved.

     

Keywords

Multiple Development Fossil Bird Specialized Bill Adult Plumage Hawaiian Honeycreeper 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bock WJ (1959) Preadaptation and multiple evolutionary pathways. Evolution 13:194–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bock WJ, Wahlert G von (1965) Adaptation and the form-function complex. Evolution 19: 269–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bonik K, Gutmann WF, Peters DS (1977) Optimierung und Ökonomisierung im Kontext von Evolutionstheorie und phylogenetischer Rekonstruktion. Acta Biotheor 26:75–119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cramp S (ed) (1985) Handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa, vol 4. Oxford Univ Press, Oxford NYGoogle Scholar
  5. Gutmann WF (1989) Die Evolution hydraulischer Konstruktionen: Organismische Wandlung statt altdarwinistischer Anpassung. Kramer, Frankfurt/MGoogle Scholar
  6. Lack D (1947) Darwin’s finches. Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge London New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Lorenz K (1975) Die Rückseite des Spiegels. Piper, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  8. Mayr E (1958) Behavior and systematics. In: Roe A, Simpson GG (eds) Behavior and evolution. Yale Univ Press, New Haven, Conn, pp 341–362Google Scholar
  9. Mayr E (1959) The emergence of evolutionary novelties. In: Tax S (ed) The evolution of life. Univ Press, Chicago, pp 349–380Google Scholar
  10. Peters DS (1983) Evolutionary theory and its consequences for the concept of adaptation. In: Grene M (ed) Dimensions of Darwinism. Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge London New York; and Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme, Paris, pp 315–327Google Scholar
  11. Peters DS (1984) Evolutionstheorie — Zwangsläufigkeit und Grenzen. In: Kaiser P, Peters DS (eds) Evolutionstheorie und Schöpfungsverständnis. Pustet, Regensburg, pp 193–218Google Scholar
  12. Peters DS (1985) Erneut vorgestellt: Das „Ökonomieprinzip“. Aufs Reden Senckenb Naturforsch Ges 35:143–153Google Scholar
  13. Peters DS (1987) Juncitarsus merkeli n.sp. stützt die Ableitung der Flamingos von Regenpfeifervögeln (Aves: Charadriiformes: Phoenicopteridae). Courier Forschungsinst Senckenb 97:141–155Google Scholar
  14. Peters DS, Gutmann WF (1971) Über die Lesrichtung von Merkmals- und Konstruktionsreihen. Z Zool Syst Evolutionsforsch 9(4):237–263Google Scholar
  15. Uexküll J von (1909) Umwelt und Innenwelt der Tiere. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Vogel S (1974) Ölblumen und ölsammelnde Bienen. Steiner, WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  17. Vogel S (1981) Abdominal oil-mopping — a new type of foraging in bees. Naturwissenschaften 67:627–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dieter Stefan Peters
    • 1
  1. 1.Forschungsinstitut SenckenbergFrankfurt/M.Germany

Personalised recommendations