Dollosches law

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Dollo'sche law of irreversibility of development refers to the biological field of evolution and states that a certain complexity, once lost, not in a phylogenetically younger body completely evolves re- be. Animal species that are once extinct do not appear again in geological history. But even complex features that have disappeared are never completely restored in the same way in reverse .

This phenomenon, also known as Dollos Law or Dollos Rule , was formulated around 1890 by the French paleontologist Louis Dollo (1857–1931) and states that evolution takes place as a directed process ( orthoevolution ) and is in principle irreversible.

So have z. B. the ungulates and odd ungulates with their reduced number of toes never produced more species with a higher number of toes again. Mammals that have passed over to aquatic life have never again developed gills , although they are always created in an embryonic manner.

Dollo's law does not include the re-evolution of partially original structures or less complex mechanisms, such as B. the secondary waterway of terrestrial vertebrates ( whales , dolphins ). Furthermore, the convergent development towards functionally identical organs is also not taken into account.

Various exceptions have been suggested that appear to violate the law. Michael F. Whiting and colleagues found that some species of ghosts lost their ability to fly, but regained their ability to fly 50 million years later. Species of snails developed twisted shells, the ancestors of which possessed simplified, non-twisted shells. In a family of horned mites , sexual reproduction occurred again in a lineage that the ancestors had lost, presumably millions of years ago. At the molecular level, however, the law was confirmed in 2009 when studying the development of glucocorticoid receptors.

The conclusiveness of the morphological counterexamples is disputed by other scientists, who point out that methodological errors in the underlying models can have serious effects. This means that possibly other explanations could explain the facts as well or better without violating Dollo's Law. A final clarification as to whether Dollo's law is actually violated in nature is still pending.

literature

  • Stephen Jay Gould : Dollo on Dollo's Law: Irreversibility and the Status of Evolutionary Laws , Journal of the History of Biology, Volume 3, 1970, pp. 189-212

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Detlef Weinich: Decay and decline. Civilizational change from the perspective of evolutionary epistemology. In: Würzburger medical history reports 17, 1998, pp. 473–504; here: p. 480 f.
  2. ↑ a review: Rachel Collin & Maria Pia Miglietta (2008): Reversing opinions on Dollo's Law. Trends in Ecology & Evolution Volume 23, Issue 11: 602-609. doi : 10.1016 / j.tree.2008.06.013
  3. ^ Whiting, Sven Bradler, Taylor Maxwell Loss and Recovery of Wings in Stick Insects , Nature, Volume 421, 2003, pp. 264-267, Abstract , Walking before flying
  4. ^ R. Collin & R. Cipriani (2003): Dollo's law and the re-evolution of shell coiling , Proceedings of the Royal Society, Biological Sciences, Volume 270, 2003, 2551-2555 doi : 10.1098 / rspb.2003.2517
  5. ↑ Katja Domes, Roy A. Norton, Mark Maraun, Stefan Scheu (2007): Revolution of sexuality breaks Dollo's law. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA vol. 104 no. 17: 7139-7144. doi : 10.1073 / pnas.0700034104
  6. ↑ Bridgham, Ortlund, Joseph W. Thornton Nature, Volume 461, 2009, p. 515, article in the New York Times, September 29, 2009 , Protein burns its evolutionary bridges , Nature News 2009
  7. ↑ Emma E. Goldberg & Boris Igic (2008): On phylogenetic tests of irreversible evolution. Evolution 62 (11): 2727-2741 doi : 10.1111 / j.1558-5646.2008.00505.x