The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A DEVELOPMENTAL ANALYSIS OF AN EVOLUTIONARY TREND: DIGITAL REDUCTION IN AMPHIBIANS
Abstract
In this study, we integrate information from phylogeny, comparative ontogeny, and experimental embryology in an attempt to elucidate the mechanisms controlling evolutionary trends towards digital reduction and loss observed in amphibians. Frogs and salamanders that have lost phalanges and even whole toes have done so in a very ordered manner, i.e., certain skeletal elements are lost prior to others. This pattern of morphological diversity is described and trends elucidated. It is concluded that the process is characterized by striking intraordinal convergences coupled with substantial differences between the trends observed in frogs as compared to urodeles. We argue that this pattern is essentially a reflection of the differences in the ontogenies of the two orders. Similarly, the convergences within urodeles and within anurans can be explained as the result of regulation of developmental parameters in a resilient developmental program. We further explore this hypothesis by experimentally perturbing the number of cells in the embryonic limb primordium to show that reduction in the number of mesenchymal cells secondarily affects the developmental process of pattern formation causing a rearrangement of the skeletal morphology of the foot. The same experimental manipulation has different effects in frogs as compared to salamanders. However, in both cases, the experimentally generated morphologies tend to parallel the phenotypes and trends observed in nature. Our conclusion is that most of the patterns of diversity in the digital morphology of amphibians can be explained as a reflection of developmental properties. In general, we present a methodology that attempts to empirically address the issue of identifying developmental constraint in morphological evolution.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Evolution, the Extended Synthesis
(2010) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/9780262513678.001.0001 · Cited by 964
Miniaturization of Body Size: Organismal Consequences and Evolutionary Significance
Hanken, J., & Wake, D. B. (1993) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.es.24.110193.002441 · Cited by 533
On the Possibility of Constructive Neutral Evolution
Stoltzfus, A. (1999) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/pl00006540 · Cited by 533
From genes to phenotype: dynamical systems and evolvability
Alberch, P. (1991) · Genetica · doi:10.1007/bf00123979 · Cited by 300
Self-citationApproaches to Macroevolution: 1. General Concepts and Origin of Variation
Jablonski, D. (2017) · Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1007/s11692-017-9420-0 · Cited by 159
Metadata
- Authors
- Alberch, P., & Gale, E. A.
- Venue
- Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1985-01
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 8-23
- ISSN
- 0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-5646
- OpenAlex
- W1991122559
- Cited by
- 343
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A DEVELOPMENTAL ANALYSIS OF AN EVOLUTIONARY TREND: DIGITAL REDUCTION IN AMPHIBIANS. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1985.tb04076.x
- The paper
- Alberch, P., & Gale, E. A. (1985). A DEVELOPMENTAL ANALYSIS OF AN EVOLUTIONARY TREND: DIGITAL REDUCTION IN AMPHIBIANS. Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1985.tb04076.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.