Cited by 59Marine Invertebrate Physiology and EcologyDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationMorphological variations and asymmetry

Did internal transport, rather than directed locomotion, favor the evolution of bilateral symmetry in animals?

Finnerty, John R.·2005·BioEssays

Abstract

The standard explanation for the origin of bilateral symmetry is that it conferred an advantage over radial symmetry for directed locomotion. However, recent developmental and phylogenetic studies suggest that bilateral symmetry may have evolved in a sessile benthic animal, predating the origin of directed locomotion. An evolutionarily feasible alternative explanation is that bilateral symmetry evolved to improve the efficiency of internal circulation by affecting the compartmentalization of the gut and the location of major ciliary tracts. This functional design principle is illustrated best by the phylum Cnidaria where symmetry varies from radial to tetraradial, biradial and bilateral. In the Cnidaria, bilateral symmetry is manifest most strongly in the internal anatomy and the disposition of ciliary tracts. Furthermore, the bilaterally symmetrical Cnidaria are typically sessile and, in those bilaterally symmetrical cnidarians that undergo directed locomotion, the secondary body axis does not bear a consistent orientation to the direction of locomotion as it typically does in Bilateria. Within the Cnidaria, the hypothesized advantage of bilateral symmetry for internal circulation can be tested by experimental analysis and computer modeling of fluid mechanics. The developmental evolution of symmetry within the Cnidaria can be further explored through comparative gene expression studies among species whose symmetry varies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bies.20299

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Finnerty, J. R.
Affiliations
Boston University (US)
Corresponding author
Finnerty, John R.
Venue
BioEssays
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-10-19
Volume
27
Issue
11
Pages
1174-1180
ISSN
  • 0265-9247 (ISSN-L)
  • 1521-1878
OpenAlex
W2164039716
Cited by
59
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • BioEssays (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Marine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Geometry and Topology › Morphological variations and asymmetry
Keywords
bilateral symmetry, radial symmetry, internal circulation, Cnidaria, fluid mechanics
MeSH terms
Animals, Biological Transport, Biological Evolution, Locomotion, Signal Transduction

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review