Functional Morphology and Evolution

Dullemeijer, P.; Barel, C.D.N.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-8851-7_4

Cited by 33 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A deductive nomological procedure for explanation of forms is developed in this paper (cf. Dullemeijer, 1974Dullemeijer, , 1985Dullemeijer and Barel, 1977;Zweers, 1985a). The reasoning is basically similar to that in the twin papers in this series (Zweers, 1991a;see Zweers, 1991b, andZweers et al, 1991, for specifications).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…These methodologies, however, do not explicitly discuss quantitative, formal modelling. Zweers (1979Zweers ( , 1985aZweers ( , 1991a has -as an extension of Dullemeijer's suggestions (Dullemeijer, 1974(Dullemeijer, , 1985Dullemeijer and Barel, 1977) for deductive explanation-proposed research schemes for quantitative investigation of integration and transformation in complex organismic systems. Otten (1985) has also developed a quantitative method for studying change in complex systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Integration of pecking, filter feeding and drinking mechanisms in waterfowl

Kooloos

Zweers

1991

Acta Biotheor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is one of several contributions in a series, illustrating the application of a specific deductive methodology to explain diversity of form. The methodology facilitates the explanation of feeding morphologies in various ducks as a transformation of the mallard's feeding design maximized for specific proportions of performance that are contributed by pecking and filter feeding mechanisms. The earlier described anatomy and formal analyses of the three mechanisms in the mallard served as the initial conditions used in simulation models. Four elements of the feeding system were chosen that play a major role in all three mechanisms. For each element, the main parameter was selected: storage capacity of the rostral mouth cavity, transport capacity of the rostral mouth tube, storage capacity of the caudal mouth cavity and transport capacity of the caudal mouth tube. The boundary conditions for the simulation were determined from internal organismic constraints. The total food uptake of the mallard was regarded as the function to be maximized. This 'object' function is the summation of the food uptake by one second of pecking and one second of filter feeding. The drinking mechanism was shown not to interfere, since that mechanism operates sufficiently whenever the pumping mechanism works properly. The 'object' function, made up by the pecking and filter feeding performances was graphed. From these graphs a morphospace was developed: the region within which modifications of the mouth design are feasible. This procedure allowed examination of the general hypothesis that different modifications of one design for a complex multi-role system are explainable from differences in proportions of the functional performance contributed by each of the roles. Two predictions were evaluated more specifically: 1) If filter feeding performance must increase for a specific change in total food uptake, the volume of the rostral mouth cavity must increase; this requires widening and lengthening of the rostral maxillar portion and also a phase shift in jaw and lingual motion patterns, increasing the stroke volume. 2) If pecking performance must increase, the transport capacity of the rostral mouth tube must increase; this requires shortening of the maxillar mid portion. These two predictions regarding change in mouth morphology were borne out by shovelers and tufted ducks, respectively.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Integration of pecking, filter feeding and drinking mechanisms in waterfowl

Kooloos

Zweers

1991

Acta Biotheor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…i.e., constructional morphology [3,7]. In addition to the functional explanation we may try a causal and a historical explanation.…”

Section: Types Of Explanationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity of functional morphological explanation

Dullemeijer

1985

Acta Biotheor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The former influUpon close examination it appears that the maence other elements and have little plasticity and jority of these interspecific structural differences include such things as the eye of fishes and parts of are relatively simple differences in the size and the pharyngeal jaw apparatus (Dutta 1968, Dutta & Chen 1983, Dullemeijer 1974, Witte & Bare1 1976, Dullemeijer & Barel 1977. Subordinate elements are characterized by high plasticity and a function demanded by the surroundings (Dullemijer 1974, Dullemeijer & Barel 1977. Dullemeijer considers such things as the lower jaw, maxilla and ectopterygoid as examples of subordinate elements.…”

Section: Adaptations Of the Jawsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Apart from differences in the jaw bones, Burgess (1978) found the skeletons of various butterflyfish species to be essentially similar. Dullemeijer & Barel (1977) argue that natural selection should affect the variability of dominant components as subordinate ones have to follow the dominant component, when this does not happen the result is an abnormal or lethal ontogeny. However, it appears to me that when the variability of the subordinate component does not affect the dominant one, then natural selection can operate on the subordinate.…”

Section: Adaptations Of the Jawsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional morphology of the head of Hawaiian and Mid-Pacific butterflyfishes (Perciformes, Chaetodontidae)

Motta

1985

Environ Biol Fish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SynopsisThe functional morphology of the jaws of six species of butterflyfishes was investigated and related to their feeding behaviors. Utilizing observations and measurements of fresh-killed specimens as well as scanning electron microscopy of their dentitions, interspecific differences in the size, shape, orientation of the mouth, dentition, degree and function of jaw protrusion were related to their different feeding behaviors. The jaws of the six species showed a variety of adaptations for feeding on or over the reef as well as a repertoire of modulated jaw movements hitherto unnoticed in many studies. This radiation in morphologies was believed to be due to relatively simple changes of a few structural elements, changes that could occur relatively rapidly in the evolutionary time scale. The benefit of naturalistic observations in such functional morphological studies was emphasized.

show abstract

Functional Morphology and Evolution

Cited by 33 publications

References 13 publications

Integration of pecking, filter feeding and drinking mechanisms in waterfowl

Integration of pecking, filter feeding and drinking mechanisms in waterfowl

Diversity of functional morphological explanation

Functional morphology of the head of Hawaiian and Mid-Pacific butterflyfishes (Perciformes, Chaetodontidae)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About