• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >The Burgess Shale: A Cambrian mirror for modern evolutionary biology.
【24h】

The Burgess Shale: A Cambrian mirror for modern evolutionary biology.

机译：伯吉斯页岩：现代进化生物学的寒武纪镜像。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The Burgess Shale, discovered in 1909, contains the fossilized remains of unusual marine animals from shortly after the Cambrian explosion. This thesis delineates three distinct phases in Burgess Shale research. It examines why the Burgess Shale has inspired such dissimilar interpretations and asks what the consequences of these different views are for our understanding of the tempo and mode of evolution and the place of systematics in evolutionary biology.;The Burgess Shale fossils were initially classified by Charles Doolittle Walcott as primitive members of modern groups. Later, in the 1960s, Cambridge (UK) paleontologists, led by Harry Whittington, came to think of the Burgess creatures as unique evolutionary experiments, unrelated to modern animal phyla. This "weird wonders" view was taken to its extreme by Stephen Jay Gould. Gould used the Burgess fossils to advance a highly distinctive theory of the tempo and mode of evolution, and to argue that morphological disparity has decreased over time, not increased as commonly believed. Gould held to this view until his death. The third phase, initiated by Derek Briggs and Simon Conway Morris in the 1980s, gives a very different interpretation to the Burgess Shale. On this new understanding, disparity has not decreased, and the Burgess creatures are no longer weird wonders deserving unique phylum status, but are now seen as "stem groups" on the evolutionary paths leading up to the modern phyla.;This thesis investigates the motivations of the protagonists in this debate. Briggs and Conway Morris each arrived at their Phase 3 view for different reasons. Briggs credited the adoption of cladistics, a new method of classification. Conway Morris credited the increased information provided by the discovery of new fossils, and the re-interpretation of known fossils. Despite the fact that Gould and Conway Morris both dismissed cladistics as an inadequate tool for the study of biological diversity, they held radically divergent views about the diversity of the Burgess Shale. This dissertation will show that these men had different theories of the tempo and mode of evolution; therefore, each saw the Burgess fossils in the light of his own theories, assumptions, and goals.
机译：于1909年发现的伯吉斯页岩包含了寒武纪爆炸后不久的不寻常海洋动物的化石遗骸。本文描述了伯吉斯页岩研究的三个不同阶段。它探讨了为什么伯吉斯页岩化石激发了这种不同的解释，并询问这些不同观点对我们对进化的速度和方式以及系统生物学在进化生物学中的地位的理解有何后果。;伯吉斯页岩化石最初是由查尔斯分类的杜利特尔·沃尔科特（Doolittle Walcott）是现代团体的原始成员。后来，在1960年代，由哈里·惠廷顿（Harry Whittington）领导的英国剑桥古生物学家开始将伯吉斯生物视为独特的进化实验，与现代动物门无关。斯蒂芬·杰伊·古尔德（Stephen Jay Gould）将这种“怪异的奇迹”观点推向了极端。古尔德利用伯吉斯化​​石推进了关于速度和演化模式的高度独特的理论，并指出形态差异随着时间的推移而减少，而没有像通常认为的那样增加。古尔德坚持这一观点直到他去世。第三阶段由德里克·布里格斯（Derek Briggs）和西蒙·康威·莫里斯（Simon Conway Morris）在1980年代发起，对伯吉斯页岩做出了截然不同的解释。根据这种新的理解，差距并没有减少，并且伯吉斯的生物不再是应得的独特门位的怪异奇迹​​，而是现在被视为通往现代门位的进化路径上的“茎群”。在这场辩论中的主角。 Briggs和Conway Morris各自出于不同的原因进入了他们的第3阶段视图。布里格斯认为采用分类法是一种新的分类方法。康威·莫里斯（Conway Morris）认为，新化石的发现和对已知化石的重新解释提供了越来越多的信息。尽管古尔德和康威·莫里斯都认为，分类学不是研究生物多样性的适当工具，但他们对伯吉斯页岩的多样性持有截然不同的看法。这篇论文将表明这些人对速度和发展方式有不同的理论。因此，每个人都根据自己的理论，假设和目标看到了伯吉斯化石。

著录项

  • 作者

    Brysse, Keynyn Alexandra Ripley.;

  • 作者单位

    University of Toronto (Canada).;

  • 授予单位 University of Toronto (Canada).;
  • 学科 Paleontology.;History of Science.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2008
  • 页码 296 p.
  • 总页数 296
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 古生物学;自然科学史;
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 11:39:11

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号