Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Homology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Philosophy of Biology

Part of the book series: History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences ((HPTL,volume 1))

Abstract

Homology is the core concept of comparative biology. Or, better, a variegated flock of concepts about relationships between character states in different biological units, the latter being either modular parts of one biological individual or conspecific individuals differing either in sex or developmental stage or, more commonly, representative individuals of different species. The chapter includes a historical overview of the subject and a definitional characterization of the many concepts of homology proposed since Owen (Lectures on the comparative anatomy and physiology of the invertebrate animals, delivered at the Royal College of Surgeons. Longman Brown Green and Longmans, London, 1843), contrasting non-historical, historical and factorial notions of homology, followed by a detailed analysis of ‘sameness’ across evolutionary time, developmental time and body space. A special section presents a selection of fields of application of the concept, like phylogenetic inference, the study of evolutionary novelties, biological nomenclature and reconstruction of the ancestral taxa. The chapter terminates with some educational suggestions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abouheif, E. 1997. Developmental genetics and homology: A hierarchical approach. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 12: 405–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abouheif, E. 1999. Establishing homology criteria for regulatory gene networks: Prospects and challenges. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 207–225. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akam, M. 1989. Hox and HOM: Homologous gene clusters in insects and vertebrates. Cell 57: 347–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akam, M. 1998a. Hox genes, homeosis and the evolution of segment identity: No need for hopeless monsters. The International Journal of Developmental Biology 42: 445–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akam, M. 1998b. Hox genes: From master genes to micromanagers. Current Biology 8: R676–R678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akam, M. 1999. [Discussion to Abouheif (1999), op. cit., pp. 224–225]

    Google Scholar 

  • Appel, T.A. 1987. The Cuvier-Geoffroy debate: French biology in the decades before Darwin. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, D. 2005. Genes and homology in nervous system evolution: Comparing gene functions, expression patterns, and cell type molecular fingerprints. Theory in Biosciences 124: 185–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, D., and K. Nübler-Jung. 1994. Inversion of dorsoventral axis? Nature 371: 26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atz, J.W. 1970. The application of the idea of homology to behavior. In Development and evolution of behavior, ed. L.R. Aronson, E. Tobach, D.S. Lehrman, and J.S. Rosenblatt, 53–74. San Francisco: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ax, P. 1989. Homologie in der Biologie – ein Relationsbegriff im Vergleich von Arten. Zoologische Beiträge (Berlin) N.F. 32: 487–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, D.A., S.D. Smith, and S.S.S. Donovan. 2005. The tree-thinking challenge. Science 310: 979–980; Supporting Online Material: www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/310/5750/979/DC1. (Tree-thinking quizzes I and II).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, W.J. 1974. Philosophical foundations of classical evolutionary classification. Systematic Zoology 22: 375–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, W.J. 1989. The homology concept: Its philosophical foundation and practical methodology. Zoologische Beiträge (Berlin) N.F. 32: 327–353.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolker, J., and R.A. Raff. 1996. Developmental genetics and traditional homology. BioEssays 18: 489–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bookstein, F.L. 1994. Can biometrical shape be a homologous character? In Homology: The hierarchical basis of comparative biology, ed. B.K. Hall, 197–227. San Diego/London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyden, A.A. 1935. Genetics and homology. The Quarterly Review of Biology 10: 448–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyden, A.A. 1943. Homology and analogy: A century after the definitions of “homologue” and “analogue” of Richard Owen. The Quarterly Review of Biology 18: 228–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyden, A.A. 1947. Homology and analogy. A critical review of the meanings and implications of these concepts in biology. American Midland Naturalist 37: 648–669.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breidbach, O. 2003. Post-Haeckelian comparative biology – Adolf Naef’s idealistic morphology. Theory in Biosciences 122: 174–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breidbach, O., and W. Kutsch. 1990. Structural homology of identified motoneurons in larval and adult stages of hemi- and holometabolous insects. The Journal of Comparative Neurology 297: 392–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigandt, I. 2002. Homology and the origin of correspondence. Biology and Philosophy 17: 389–407.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigandt, I. 2003. Homology in comparative, molecular, and evolutionary developmental biology: The radiation of a concept. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 299B: 9–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigandt, I. 2006. Homology and heterochrony: The evolutionary embryologist Gavin Rylands de Beer (1899–1972). Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 306B: 317–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigandt, I. 2007. Typology now: Homology and developmental constraints explain evolvability. Biology and Philosophy 22: 709–725.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigandt, I., and P.E. Griffiths. 2007. The importance of homology for biology and philosophy. Biology and Philosophy 22: 633–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brigandt, I., and A.C. Love. 2010. Evolutionary novelty and the evo-devo synthesis: Field notes. Evolutionary Biology 37: 93–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brower, A.V.Z. 2000. Homology and the inference of systematic relationships: Some historical and philosophical perspectives. In Homology and systematics: Coding characters for phylogenetic analysis, ed. R.W. Scotland and T. Pennington, 10–21. London/New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, A.C., and A. Feduccia. 1997. Developmental patterns and the identification of homologies in the avian hand. Science 278: 666–668.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler, A.B., and W.M. Saidel. 2000. Defining sameness: Historical, biological, and generative homology. BioEssays 22: 846–853.

    Google Scholar 

  • Darwin, C. 1859. On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: Murray.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Beer, G.R. 1958. Embryos and ancestors, 3rd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Beer, G.R. 1971. Homology: An unsolved problem. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Pinna, M.C.C. 1991. Concepts and tests of homology in the cladistic paradigm. Cladistics 7: 367–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeRobertis, E.M., and Y. Sasai. 1996. A common plan for dorsoventral patterning in Bilateria. Nature 380: 37–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson, W.J. 1995. Molecules and morphology: Where’s the homology? Trends in Genetics 11: 119–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donoghue, M.J. 1992. Homology. In Key words in evolutionary biology, ed. E. Fox Keller and E.A. Lloyd, 170–179. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duboule, D. 1994. Temporal colinearity and the phylotypic progression: A basis for the stability of a vertebrate Bauplan and the evolution of morphologies through heterochrony. Development 1994(Supplement): 135–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edgecombe, G.D. 2008. Anatomical nomenclature: Homology, standardization and datasets. In Updating the Linnaean heritage: Names as tools for thinking about animals and plants, Zootaxa 1950, ed. A. Minelli, L. Bonato, and G. Fusco, 87–95. Auckland: Magnolia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ereshefsky, M. 2007. Psychological categories as homologies: Lessons from ethology. Biology and Philosophy 22: 659–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ereshefsky, M. 2010. Homology: Integrating phylogeny and development. Biological Theory 4: 225–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ereshefsky, M. 2012. Homology thinking. Biology and Philosophy 27: 381–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felsenstein, J. 2004. Inferring phylogenies. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrier, D.E.K. 2008. When is a Hox gene not a Hox gene? The importance of gene nomenclature. In Evolving pathways. Key themes in evolutionary developmental biology, ed. A. Minelli and G. Fusco, 175–193. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitch, W.M. 1970. Distinguishing homologous from analogous proteins. Systematic Zoology 19: 99–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fusco, G. 2008. Morphological nomenclature, between patterns and processes: Segments and segmentation as a paradigmatic case. In Updating the Linnaean heritage: Names as tools for thinking about animals and plants, Zootaxa 1950, ed. A. Minelli, L. Bonato, and G. Fusco, 96–102. Auckland: Magnolia Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galis, F. 1996. The evolution of insects and vertebrates: Homeobox genes and homology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 11: 402–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galis, F. 1999. On the homology of structures and Hox genes: The vertebral column. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 80–94. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gans, C. 1974. Biomechanics: An approach to vertebrate biology. Philadelphia: Lippincott.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gehring, W.J. 2002. The genetic control of eye development and its implications for the evolution of the various eye-types. The International Journal of Developmental Biology 46: 65–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, E. 1807. Considérations sur les pièces de la tête osseuse des animaux vertébrés, et particulièrement sur celles du crâne des oiseaux. Annales du Muséum d’histoire naturelle Paris 10: 342–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, E. 1822. Considérations générales sur la vertèbre. Mémoires du Muséum d’histoire naturelle Paris 9: 89–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghiselin, M.T. 1976. The nomenclature of correspondence: A new look at “homology” and “analogy”. In Evolution, brain, and behavior: Persistent problems, ed. R.B. Masterton, W. Hodos, and H. Jerison, 129–142. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Association Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghiselin, M.T. 2005. Homology as a relation of correspondence between parts of individuals. Theory in Biosciences 124: 91–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghiselin, M.T. 2006. The failure of morphology to contribute to the modern synthesis. Theory in Biosciences 124: 309–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, S.F., and J.A. Bolker. 2001. Homologies of process and modular elements of embryonic construction. In The character concept in evolutionary biology, ed. G.P. Wagner, 437–456. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, B. 1993. Homology and a generative theory of biological form. Acta Biotheoretica 41: 305–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, H.W. 1999. Natural history and behavioural homology. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 173–188. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, P.E. 2006. Function, homology, and character individuation. Philosophy of Science 73: 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grygier, M.J. 1994. Developmental patterns and hypotheses of homology in the antennules of thecostracan nauplius larvae (Crustacea). Acta Zoologica 75: 219–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halder, G., P. Callaerts, and W.J. Gehring. 1995. Induction of ectopic eyes by targeted expression of the eyeless gene in Drosophila. Science 267: 1788–1792.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B.K. (ed.). 1994. Homology: The hierarchical basis of comparative biology. San Diego/London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B.K. 1995. Homology and embryonic development. Evolutionary Biology 28: 1–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B.K. 1998. Germ layers and the germ-layer theory revisited: Primary and secondary germ layers, neural crest as a fourth germ layer, homology, and demise of the germ-layer theory. Evolutionary Biology 30: 121–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B.K. 2003. Descent with modification: The unity underlying homology and homoplasy as seen through an analysis of development and evolution. Biological Reviews 78: 409–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B.K. 2005. Consideration of the neural crest and its skeletal derivatives in the context of novelty/innovation. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 304B: 548–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B.K., and R. Kerney. 2012. Levels of biological organization and the origin of novelty. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 318: 428–437.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallam, S.J., and Jin Yishi. 1998. lin-14 regulates the timing of synaptic remodelling in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nature 395: 78–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanken, J. 1986. Developmental evidence for amphibian origins. Evolutionary Biology 20: 389–417.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanken, J. 1999. Larvae in amphibian development and evolution. In The origin and evolution of larval forms, ed. B.K. Hall and M.H. Wake, 61–108. San Diego/London/Boston/New York/Sydney/Tokyo/Toronto: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, M.W., and G.A. Wray. 1999. Heterochrony. In The origin and evolution of larval forms, ed. B.K. Hall and M.H. Wake, 159–165. San Diego/London/Boston/New York/Sydney/Tokyo/Toronto: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haszprunar, G. 1992. The types of homology and their significance for evolutionary biology and phylogenetics. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 5: 13–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hejnol, A., and M.Q. Martindale. 2008. Acoel development supports a simple planula-like urbilaterian. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 363: 1493–1501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendler, G. 1978. Development of Amphioplus abditus (Verrill) (Echinodermata: Ophiuroidea). II. Description and discussion of ophiuroid skeletal ontogenies and homologies. The Biological Bulletin 154: 79–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendler, G. 1988. Ophiuroid skeleton ontogeny reveals homologies among skeletal plates of adults: A study of Amphiura filiformis, Amphiura stimpsonii and Ophiophragmus filograneus (Echinodermata). The Biological Bulletin 174: 20–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennig, W. 1966. Phylogenetic systematics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, J.J., and R.A. Raff. 1990. Evolutionary change in the process of dorsoventral axis determination in the direct developing sea urchin, Heliocidaris erythrogramma. Developmental Biology 141: 55–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinchliffe, J.R., and M.K. Hecht. 1984. Homology of the bird wing skeleton. Embryological versus paleontological evidence. Evolutionary Biology 18: 21–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinchliffe, J.R., and E.I. Vorobyeva. 1999. Developmental basis of limb homology in urodeles: Heterochronic evidence from the primitive hynobiid family. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 95–109. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodos, W. 1976. The concept of homology and the evolution of behavior. In Evolution, brain, and behavior: Persistent problems, ed. R.B. Masterton, W. Hodos, and H. Jerison, 153–167. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Association Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, N.D., and L.Z. Holland. 1999. Amphioxus and the utility of molecular genetic data for hypothesizing body part homologies between distantly related animals. American Zoologist 39: 630–640.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, N.D., L.Z. Holland, Y. Honma, and T. Fujii. 1993. Engrailed expression during development of a lamprey, Lampetra japonica: A possible clue to homologies between agnathan and gnathostome muscles of the mandibular arch. Development Growth and Differentiation 35: 153–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, P.W.H. 1999. The effect of gene duplication on homology. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 226–242. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoßfeld, U., and L. Olsson. 2005. The history of the homology concept and the “phylogenetisches symposium”. Theory in Biosciences 124: 243–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglis, W.G. 1966. The observational basis of homology. Systematic Zoology 15: 219–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jardine, N. 1967. The concept of homology in biology. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 18: 125–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jardine, N. 1969. The observational and theoretical components of homology: A study based on the morphology of the dermal skull-roofs of rhipidistian fishes. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 1: 327–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, N., M.J. Westbrook, S.L. Young, A. Kuo, M. Abedin, J. Chapman, S. Fairclough, U. Hellsten, Y. Isogai, I. Letunic, M. Marr, D. Pincus, N. Putnam, A. Rokas, K.J. Wright, R. Zuzow, W. Dirks, M. Good, D. Goodstein, D. Lemons, W. Li, J.B. Lyons, A. Morris, S. Nichols, D.J. Richter, A. Salamoi, J.G.I. Sequencing, P. Bork, W.A. Lim, G. Manning, W.T. Miller, W. McGinnis, H. Shapiro, R. Tjian, I.V. Grigoriev, and D. Rokhsar. 2008. The genome of the choanoflagellate Monosiga brevicollis and the origin of metazoans. Nature 451: 783–788.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleisner, K. 2007. The formation of the theory of homology in biological sciences. Acta Biotheoretica 55: 317–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosswig, G. 1961. Über sogenannte homologe Gene. Zoologischer Anzeiger 166: 333–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laubichler, M.D. 2000. Homology in development and the development of the homology concept. American Zoologist 40: 777–788.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lecointre, G., and H. Le Guyader. 2006. The tree of life: A phylogenetic classification. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liem, K.F., and D.W. Wake. 1985. Morphology: Current approaches and concepts. In Functional vertebrate morphology, ed. M. Hildebrand, D.M. Bramble, K.F. Liem, and D.W. Wake, 366–377. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Love, A.C. 2007. Functional homology and homology of function: Biological concepts and philosophical consequences. Biology and Philosophy 22: 691–708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Love, A.C., and R.A. Raff. 2006. Larval ectoderm, organizational homology, and the origins of evolutionary novelty. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 306B: 18–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, W. 1969. Principles of systematic zoology. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinney, M.L. 1988. Heterochrony in evolution. A multidisciplinary approach. New York/London: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinney, M.L., and K.J. McNamara. 1991. Heterochrony. The evolution of ontogeny. New York/London: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinney, M.L., K.J. Mc Namara, and L.G. Zachos. 1990. Heterochronic hierarchies: Application and theory in evolution. Historical Biology 3: 269–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKitrick, M.C. 1994. On homology and the ontological relationship of parts. Systematic Biology 43: 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, K.J. 1986. A guide to the nomenclature of heterochrony. Journal of Paleontology 60: 4–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, A. 1998. We are devo-evo. Trends in Genetics 14: 482–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaux, B. 1989. Homology: A question of form or a product of genealogy? Rivista di Biologia 82: 217–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mindell, D.P., and A. Meyer. 2001. Homology evolving. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16: 434–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A. 1996. Some thoughts on homology, 150 years after Owen’s definition. Memorie della Società italiana di Scienze naturali e del Museo civico di Storia naturale di Milano 27(1): 71–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A. 1998. Molecules, developmental modules and phenotypes: A combinatorial approach to homology. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 9: 340–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A. 2000. Limbs and tail as evolutionarily diverging duplicates of the main body axis. Evolution and Development 2: 157–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A. 2002. Homology, limbs and genitalia. Evolution and Development 4: 127–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A. 2003. The development of animal form: Ontogeny, morphology, and evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A., C. Brena, G. Deflorian, D. Maruzzo, and G. Fusco. 2006a. From embryo to adult – Beyond the conventional periodization of arthropod development. Development Genes and Evolution 216: 373–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A., and G. Fusco. 1995. Body segmentation and segment differentiation: The scope for heterochronic change. In Evolutionary change and heterochrony, ed. K.J. McNamara, 49–63. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A., and G. Fusco. 2004. Evo-devo perspectives on segmentation: Model organisms, and beyond. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 19: 423–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A., and G. Fusco. 2005. Conserved versus innovative features in animal body organization. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 304B: 520–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A., E. Negrisolo, and G. Fusco. 2006b. Reconstructing animal phylogeny in the light of evolutionary developmental biology. In Reconstructing the tree of life: Taxonomy and systematics of species rich taxa (Systematics Association special series volume 72), ed. T.R. Hodkinson, J.A.N. Parnell, and S. Waldren, 177–190. Boca Raton: Taylor & Francis/CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A., and B. Peruffo. 1991. Developmental pathways, homology and homonomy in metameric animals. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 4: 429–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minelli, A., and F.R. Schram. 1994. Owen revisited: A reappraisal of morphology in evolutionary biology. Bijdragen tot de Dierkunde 64: 65–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moczek, A.P. 2008. On the origins of novelty in development and evolution. BioEssays 30: 432–447.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moczek, A.P., and L.M. Nagy. 2005. Diverse developmental mechanisms contribute to different levels of diversity in horned beetles. Evolution and Development 7: 175–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moczek, A.P., and D.J. Rose. 2009. Differential recruitment of limb patterning genes during development and diversification of beetle horns. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106: 8992–8997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, G.B. 2001. Homologie und Analogie: die vergleichende Grundlage von Morphologie und Ethologie. In Konrad Lorenz und seine verhaltensbiologischen Konzepte aus heutiger Sicht, ed. K. Kotrschal, G.B. Müller, and H. Winkler, 127–137. Fürth: Filander Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, G.B. 2003. Homology: The evolution of morphological organization. In Origination of organismal form: Beyond the gene in developmental and evolutionary biology, ed. G.B. Müller and S.A. Newman, 51–69. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, G.B., and S.A. Newman. 1999. Generation, integration, autonomy: Three steps in the evolution of homology. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 65–79. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, G.B., and G.P. Wagner. 1991. Novelty in evolution: Restructuring the concept. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 22: 229–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, G.B., and G.P. Wagner. 1996. Homology, Hox genes, and developmental integration. American Zoologist 36: 4–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, G.B., and G.P. Wagner. 2003. Innovation. In Keywords and concepts in evolutionary developmental biology, ed. B.K. Hall and W.M. Olson, 218–227. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, C., and P. Martinez. 2003. Patterns of gene expression: Homology or homocracy? Development Genes and Evolution 213: 149–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nixon, K.C., and J.M. Carpenter. 2011. On homology. Cladistics 27: 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osche, G. 1973. Das Homologisieren als eine grundlegende Methode der Phylogenetik. Aufsätze und Reden der Senckenbergischen naturforschenden Gesellschaft 24: 155–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Owen, R. 1843. Lectures on the comparative anatomy and physiology of the invertebrate animals, delivered at the Royal College of Surgeons. London: Longman Brown Green and Longmans.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panchen, A.L. 1992. Classification, evolution, and the nature of biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panchen, A.L. 1994. Richard Owen and the concept of homology. In Homology: The hierarchical basis of comparative biology, ed. B.K. Hall, 21–62. San Diego/London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panchen, A.L. 1999. Homology – History of a concept. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 5–23. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, C. 1982. Morphological characters and homology. In Problems of phylogenetic reconstruction (The Systematics Association special volume no. 21), ed. K.A. Joysey and A.E. Friday, 21–74. London: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, C. 1988. Homology in classical and molecular biology. Molecular Biology and Evolution 5: 603–625.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, K. 1922. Zur Geschichte und Kritik des Begriffs “Homologie” und seine Anwendung in der Embryologie. Biologisches Zentralblatt 42: 308–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pigliucci, M. 2001. Characters and environments. In The character concept in evolutionary biology, ed. G.P. Wagner, 363–388. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Priest, G. 2000. Logic: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raff, R.A. 1999. Larval homology and radical evolutionary changes in early development. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 110–124. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raff, R.A., B.A. Parr, A.L. Parks, and G.A. Wray. 1990. Heterochrony and other mechanisms of radical evolutionary change in early development. In Evolutionary innovations, ed. M.H. Nitecki, 71–98. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raff, R.A., and G.A. Wray. 1989. Heterochrony: Developmental mechanisms and evolutionary results. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 2: 409–434.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, G., and A.S. Peterson. 2012. Sameness in biology. Philosophy of Science 79: 255–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reeck, G.R.C., C. De Haen, D.C. Doolittle, W.M. Fitch, R.E. Dickerson, P. Chambon, A. McLachlan, E. Margoliash, T.H. Jukes, and E. Zuckerkandl. 1987. “Homology” in proteins and nucleic acids: A terminology muddle and a way out of it. Cell 50: 667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reif, W.E. 2004. Problematic issues of cladistics: 3. Homology and apomorphy; ontology versus operationalism. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen 231: 395–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, S.M., E.O. Wiley, and D.T. Meinhardt. 1997. An integrative approach to heterochrony: The distinction between interspecific and intraspecific phenomena. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 60: 119–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remane, A. 1952. Die Grundlagen des natürlichen Systems, der vergleichenden Anatomie und der Phylogenetik. Leipzig: Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft Geest und Portig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remane, A. 1955. Morphologie als Homologienforschung. Verhandlungen der Deutschen zoologischen Gesellschaft 1954: 159–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remane, A. 1963. Über die Homologisierungsmöglichkeiten bei Verbindungsstrukturen (Muskeln, Blutgefäßen, Nerven) und Hohlräumen. Zoologischer Anzeiger 166: 481–489.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remane, J. 1989. Die Entwicklung des Homologie-Begriffs seit Adolf Remane. Zoologische Beiträge (Berlin) N.F. 32: 497–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reuter, R. 1994. The gene serpent has homeotic properties and specifies endoderm versus ectoderm within the Drosophila gut. Development 120: 1123–1135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, M.K. 1995. Heterochrony and the phylotypic period. Developmental Biology 172: 412–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, M.K., J. Hanken, M.L. Gooneratne, C. Pieau, A. Raynaud, L. Selwood, and G.M. Wright. 1997. There is no highly conserved embryonic stage in the verytebrates: Implications for current theories of evolution and development. Anatomy and Embryology 196: 91–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richter, S. 2005. Homologies in phylogenetic analyses – Concept and tests. Theory in Biosciences 124: 105–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riedl, R. 1980. Homologien; ihre Grunde und Erkenntnisgrunde. Verhandlungen der Deutschen zoologischen Gesellschaft 73: 164–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieppel, O.C. 1988. Fundamentals of comparative biology. Basel/Boston/Berlin: Birkhäuser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieppel, O. 1992. Homology and logical fallacy. Journal of Molecular Biology 5: 701–715.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieppel, O. 1993a. Studies on skeleton formation in reptiles. II. Chamaeleo hoehnelii (Squamata: Chamaeleoninae), with comments on the homology of carpal and tarsal bones. Herpetologica 49: 66–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieppel, O. 1993b. Studies on skeleton formation in reptiles. IV. The homology of the reptilian (amniote) astragalus revisited. Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology 13: 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieppel, O. 2005. Modules, kinds, and homology. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 304B: 18–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolian, C., D.E. Lieberman, and B. Hallgrímsson. 2010. The coevolution of human hands and feet. Evolution 64: 1558–1568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, V.L. 1984. On homology. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 22: 13–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, V.L. 1988. The biological basis of homology. In Ontogeny and systematics, ed. C.J. Humphries, 1–26. London/New York: British Museum (Natural History)/Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, V.L. 1991. Homology and hierarchies: Problems solved and unresolved. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 4: 167–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutishauser, R., and P. Moline. 2005. Evo-devo and the search for homology (“sameness”) in biological systems. Theory in Biosciences 124: 213–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sander, K. 1983. The evolution of patterning mechanisms: Gleanings from insect embryogenesis. In Development and evolution, ed. B.C. Goodwin, N. Holder, and C.C. Wylie, 137–159. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sander, K. 1989. Zum Geleit: Homologie und Ontogenese. Zoologische Beiträge (Berlin) N.F. 32: 323–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sattler, R. 1994. Homology, homeosis, and process morphology in plants. In Homology: The hierarchical basis of comparative biology, ed. B.K. Hall, 423–475. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schierwater, B., and K. Kuhn. 1998. Homology of Hox genes and the zootype concept in early metazoan evolution. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 9: 375–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlosser, G. 2002. Modularity and the units of evolution. Theory in Biosciences 121: 1–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlosser, G., and G.P. Wagner (eds.). 2004. Modularity in development and evolution. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M. 1989. Das Homologie-Konzept in Morphologie und Phylogenetik. Zoologische Beiträge (Berlin) N.F. 32: 505–512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, M. 1995. The homology concept – Still alive. In The nervous systems of invertebrates. An evolutionary and comparative approach, ed. O. Breidbach and O. Kutsch, 425–438. Basel: Birkhäuser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholtz, G. 2005. Homology and ontogeny: Pattern and process in comparative developmental biology. Theory in Biosciences 124: 121–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholtz, G. 2008. On comparisons and causes in evolutionary developmental biology. In Evolving pathways, ed. A. Minelli and G. Fusco, 144–159. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholtz, G. 2010. Deconstructing morphology. Acta Zoologica (Stockholm) 91: 44–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serres, E. 1827. Recherches d’anatomie trascendante sur les lois de l’organogénie appliquées à l’anatomie pathologique. Annales de sciences naturelles Paris 11: 47–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubin, N., and D. Wake. 1996. Phylogeny, variation, and morphological integration. American Zoologist 36: 51–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shubin, N., C. Tabin, and S. Carroll. 2009. Deep homology and the origins of evolutionary novelty. Nature 457: 818–823.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slack, F., and G. Ruvkun. 1997. Temporal pattern formation by heterochronic genes. Annual Review of Genetics 31: 611–634.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slack, J.M.W., P.W.H. Holland, and C.F. Graham. 1993. The zootype and the phylotypic stage. Nature 361: 490–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sluys, R. 1996. The notion of homology in current comparative biology. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 34: 145–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober, E. 1988. Reconstructing the past: Parsimony, evolution, and inference. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sober, E. 2008. Evidence and evolution: The logic behind the science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommer, R.J. 2008. Homology and the hierarchy of biological systems. BioEssays 30: 653–658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommer, R.J., and D. Tautz. 1994. Expression patterns of twist and snail in Tribolium (Coleoptera) suggest a homologous formation of mesoderm in long and short germ band insects. Developmental Genetics 15: 32–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sondergaard, L. 1993. Homology between the mammalian liver and the Drosophila fat body. Trends in Genetics 9: 193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spemann, H. 1915. Zur Geschichte und Kritik des Begriffes der Homologie. In Die Kulture der Gegenwart, 3, IV/1, Allgemeine Biologie, ed. P. Hinneberg, 63–86. Leipzig: Teubner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, P.F. 2000. On characters and character states: Do overlapping and non-overlapping variation, morphology and molecules all yield data of the same value? In Homology and systematics: Coding characters for phylogenetic analysis, ed. R.W. Scotland and R.T. Pennington, 81–105. New York: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Striedter, G.F., and R.G. Northcutt. 1991. Biological hierarchies and the concept of homology. Brain Behavior and Evolution 38: 177–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sudhaus, W. 1980. Problembereiche der Homologienforschung. Verhandlungen der Deutschen zoologischen Gesellschaft 73: 177–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szucsich, N., and C.S. Wirkner. 2007. Homology: A synthetic concept of evolutionary robustness of patterns. Zoologica Scripta 36: 281–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabin, C., and E. Laufer. 1993. Hox genes and serial homology. Nature 361: 692–693.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Valen, L. 1982. Homology and causes. Systematic Botany 173: 305–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voigt, W. 1973. Homologie und Typus in der Biologie. Jena: Fischer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G.P. 1989a. The biological homology concept. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 20: 51–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G.P. 1989b. The origin of morphological characters and the biological basis of homology. Evolution 43: 1157–1171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G.P. 1994. Homology and the mechanisms of development. In Homology: The hierarchical basis of comparative biology, ed. B.K. Hall, 273–299. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G.P. 1996. Homologues, natural kinds and the evolution of modularity. American Zoologist 36: 36–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G.P. 1999. A research programme for testing the biological homology concept. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 125–152. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G.P. 2007. The developmental genetics of homology. Nature Reviews Genetics 8: 473–479.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G.P., and L. Altenberg. 1996. Perspective: Complex adaptations and the evolution of evolvability. Evolution 50: 967–976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, G.P., and P.F. Stadler. 2003. Quasi-independence, homology and the unity of type: A topological theory of characters. Journal of Theoretical Biology 220: 505–527.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wake, D.B. 1999. Homoplasy, homology and the problem of ‘sameness’ in biology. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 24–46. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, J.W. 1992. Behavioral homology and phylogeny. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 23: 361–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, T.A. 1999. Morphogenesis and homology in arthropod limbs. American Zoologist 39: 664–675.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, D.M. 2004. Homology and homologues, cladistics and phenetics: 150 years of progress. In Milestones in systematics, ed. D.M. Williams and P.L. Forey, 191–224. Boca Raton: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, D.M., and M.C. Ebach. 2008. Foundations of systematics and biogeography. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, D.M., and C.J. Humphries. 2004. Homology and character evolution. In Deep morphology: Toward a renaissance of morphology in plant systematics, ed. T. Stuessy, E. Hörandl, and V. Mayer, 119–130. Königstein: Koeltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, E.B. 1894. The embryological criterion of homology. In Biological lectures delivered at the Marine Biological Laboratory Wood’s Hole, 101–124. Boston: Ginn & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wray, G.A. 1999. Evolutionary dissociations between homologous genes and homologous structures. In Homology (Novartis Foundation symposium 222), ed. G.R. Bock and G. Cardew, 189–206. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wray, G.A., and E. Abouheif. 1998. When is homology not homology? Current Opinion in Genetics and Development 8: 675–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wray, G.A., and R.A. Raff. 1990. Novel origins of lineage founder cells in the direct-developing sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma. Developmental Biology 141: 41–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, B.A. 1993. On the necessity of an archetypal concept in morphology with special reference to the concepts of “structure” and “homology”. Biology and Philosophy 8: 225–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, R.L., and G.P. Wagner. 2011. Why ontogenetic homology criteria can be misleading: Lessons from digit identity transformations. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution 316B: 165–170.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy

    Alessandro Minelli & Giuseppe Fusco

Authors
  1. Alessandro Minelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giuseppe Fusco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alessandro Minelli .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Educational Research & Development, Geitonas School, Vari Attikis, Athens, 1234, Attiki, Greece

    Kostas Kampourakis

Appendixes

Appendixes

1.1 Appendix 1

Grammatical tagging and cross-relations of key terms

analogy

Noun. A relation of non-sameness (see main text) between two or more similar traits or states of a trait (a pre-Darwinian concept)

analogous

Adjective. Of a (state of a) trait in analogy relationship with s.e.

analogue/analog

Noun. A (state of a) trait in analogy relationship with s.e.

apomorphic

Adjective. Of a (state of a) trait in a set of homologues that is derived, i.e. in different condition with respect to that in a reference ancestor

apomorphy

Noun. An apomorphic homologue

autapomorphy

Noun. An apomorphy exhibited by one terminal taxon

synapomorphy

Noun. An apomorphy shared by members of a taxon

homology

Noun. A relation of sameness (see main text) between two or more traits or states of a trait

homologous

Adjective. Of a (state of a) trait in homology relationship with s.e.

homologue/homolog

Noun. A (state of a) trait in homology relationship with s.e.

homoplasy

Noun. 1. A relation of non-sameness (see main text) between two or more similar traits or states of a trait. 2. A homoplastic (state of a) trait

homoplastic/homoplasious

Adjective. Of a (state of a) trait in homoplasy relationship with s.e

orthology

Noun. A type of homology relation (see main text) between two or more traits or states of a trait

orthologous

Adjective. Of a (state of a) trait in orthology relationship with s.e

orthologue/ortholog

Noun. A (state of a) trait in orthology relationship with s.e.

paralogy

Noun. A type of homology relation (see main text) between two or more traits or states of a trait

paralogous

Adjective. Of a (state of a) trait in paralogy relationship with s.e.

paralogue/paralog

Noun. A (state of a) trait in paralogy relationship with s.e.

plesiomorphic

Adjective. Of a (state of a) trait in a set of homologues that is primitive, i.e. in the same condition of that in a reference ancestor

plesiomorphy

Noun. A plesiomorphic homologue

symplesiomorphy

Noun. A plesiomorphy shared by members of a taxon

xenology

Noun. A type of homology relation (see main text) between two or more traits or states of a trait

xenologous

Adjective. Of a (state of a) trait in xenology relationship with s.e.

xenologue/xenolog

Noun. A (state of a) trait in xenology relationship with s.e.

1.2 Appendix 2

Non mutually exclusive classifications of homology

  • Classification 1

    • ○ historical (evolutionary)

    • ○ non-historical

      • ▪ idealistic (pre-Darwinian)

      • ▪ proximal-cause (e.g., developmental)

  • Classification 2

    • ○ all-or-nothing

    • ○ degree (partial)

      • ▪ quantitative

        • one-dimensional (a scalar, e.g., percentage)

        • multidimensional (a vector)

      • ▪ qualitative (factorial)

  • Classification 3

    • ○ structural similarity (e.g., DNA sequences)

    • ○ sameness

      • ▪ in space (body)

        • serial (e.g., annelid segments)

        • radial (e.g., echinoderm sectors)

        • sparse (e.g., arthropod setae)

      • ▪ in time

        • developmental

        • evolutionary

1.3 Appendix 3

A classification of similarity

  • similar (or somehow comparable)

    • homoplastic

      • by convergence

      • by parallelism

    • homologous

      • orthologous

        • apomorphic

        • plesiomorphic

      • paralogous

      • xenologous

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Minelli, A., Fusco, G. (2013). Homology. In: Kampourakis, K. (eds) The Philosophy of Biology. History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences, vol 1. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6537-5_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation