Not deconstructing serial homology, but instead, the a priori assumption that it generally involves ancestral anatomical similarity: An answer to Kuznetsov's paper,Journal of Morphology

当前位置： X-MOL 学术 › J. Morphol. › 论文详情

Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)

Not deconstructing serial homology, but instead, the a priori assumption that it generally involves ancestral anatomical similarity: An answer to Kuznetsov's paper
Journal of Morphology ( IF 1.5 ) Pub Date : 2020-10-17 , DOI: 10.1002/jmor.21273
Rui Diogo ₁

Affiliation

I am very thankful to Kuznetsov for his comments on our recent paper about serial structures published in this journal. I hope this is just the beginning of a much wider, and holistic, discussion on the evolution of serial homologous structures, and of so‐called “serial structures” in general, whether they are truly serial homologs or the secondary result of homoplasy. Strangely, Kuznetsov seems to have missed the main point of our paper, what is particularly puzzling as this point is clearly made in the very title of our paper. For instance, he states that “Siomava et al. claim that the serial homologues are false because they are ancestrally anisomeric (dissimilar)' and that” Siomava et al., (Siomava et al., Journal of Morphology, 2020, 281, 1110–1132) expected that if serial homology was true, then the serial homologs would be identical at the start and then only diverge. “ However, our paper clearly did not state this. Instead, we stated that (a) serial homology is a real phenomenon, and (b) ancestral dissimilarity is actually likely the norm, and not the exception, within serial homology. In particular, our paper showed that, as clearly stated in its title and abstract, within the evolution of serial homologues these structures “many times display trends toward less similarity while in many others display trends toward more similarity, that is, one cannot say that there is a clear, overall trend to anisomerism.” Serial homology is therefore a genuine and much widespread phenomenon within the evolution of life in this planet. It is clearly one of the most important issues—and paradoxically one of the less understood, precisely because of the a priori acceptance of long‐standing assumptions that have never been empirically tested, some of them repeated in Kuznetsov's paper—within macroevolution and comparative anatomy.

中文翻译：

不是解构序列同源性，而是先验假设，即它通常涉及祖先的解剖学相似性：对库兹涅佐夫论文的回答

我非常感谢 Kuznetsov 对我们最近发表在该期刊上的关于序列结构的论文的评论。我希望这只是关于序列同源结构和所谓的“序列结构”演化的更广泛、更全面的讨论的开始，无论它们是真正的序列同源物还是同质的次要结果。奇怪的是，库兹涅佐夫似乎没有抓住我们论文的主要观点，尤其令人费解的是，这一点在我们论文的标题中就清楚地说明了。例如，他说“Siomava 等人。声称序列同源物是错误的，因为它们是祖先的异构（不同）'，并且“Siomava 等人，（Siomava 等人，Journal of Morphology, 2020, 281, 1110–1132）预计如果序列同源性是真的，那么串行同系物在开始时将是相同的，然后只会发散。“但是，我们的论文显然没有说明这一点。相反，我们指出 (a) 序列同源性是一种真实的现象，并且 (b) 祖先差异实际上可能是序列同源性中的常态，而不是例外。特别是，我们的论文表明，正如其标题和摘要中明确指出的那样，在序列同系物的进化过程中，这些结构“很多时候表现出相似性降低的趋势，而在许多其他情况下表现出相似性增加的趋势，也就是说，不能说存在明显的、整体的异构趋势。” 因此，在这个星球的生命进化过程中，序列同源性是一种真实且广泛存在的现象。这显然是最重要的问题之一——矛盾的是，它也是鲜为人知的问题之一，

更新日期：2020-10-17

点击分享查看原文

点击收藏

阅读更多本刊最新论文本刊介绍/投稿指南11