ArticleInterface focus2021
Homology of process: developmental dynamics in comparative biology.
Article in Interface focus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Changing temporal patterns in patient-reported wish to live and wish to die signal the imminent emergence and aftermath of suicide attempts: a dynamical systems analysis.BMC psychiatry · 2025Trial
- Lateral inhibition governs ancestral cellular patterning in fossil and extant liverworts.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2026Article
- Kernel-DMD for multiome data integration and control.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Parallels in the regulatory landscape of dimorphic female and male genital structures in Drosophila melanogaster.Genetics · 2026Article
- Evolutionary Trajectories of Consciousness: From Biological Foundations to Technological Horizons.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- Understanding developmental system drift.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2024Review
- Homology of the head sensory structures between Heterotardigrada and Eutardigrada supported in a new species of water bear (Ramazzottiidae: Ramazzottius).Zoological letters · 2023Article
- The genetic basis of wing spots in Pieris canidia butterflies.BMC genomics · 2023Article
- Rebuilding ships while at sea-Character individuality, homology, and evolutionary innovation.Journal of morphology · 2023Article
- Cephalopod retinal development shows vertebrate-like mechanisms of neurogenesis.Current biology : CB · 2022Article
- The origin of RNA interference: Adaptive or neutral evolution?PLoS biology · 2022Article
- The Nasonia pair-rule gene regulatory network retains its function over 300 million years of evolution.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2022Article
- Dynamical modules in metabolism, cell and developmental biology.Interface focus · 2021Article
- Functional stress responses in Glaucophyta: Evidence of ethylene and abscisic acid functions in Cyanophora paradoxa.The Journal of eukaryotic microbiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Comparative biology builds up systematic knowledge of the diversity of life, across evolutionary lineages and levels of organization, starting with evidence from a sparse sample of model organisms. In developmental biology, a key obstacle to the growth of comparative approaches is that the concept of homology is not very well defined for levels of organization that are intermediate between individual genes and morphological characters. In this paper, we investigate what it means for ontogenetic processes to be homologous, focusing specifically on the examples of insect segmentation and vertebrate somitogenesis. These processes can be homologous without homology of the underlying genes or gene networks, since the latter can diverge over evolutionary time, while the dynamics of the process remain the same. Ontogenetic processes like these therefore constitute a dissociable level and distinctive unit of comparison requiring their own specific criteria of homology. In addition, such processes are typically complex and nonlinear, such that their rigorous description and comparison requires not only observation and experimentation, but also dynamical modelling. We propose six criteria of process homology, combining recognized indicators (sameness of parts, morphological outcome and topological position) with novel ones derived from dynamical systems modelling (sameness of dynamical properties, dynamical complexity and evidence for transitional forms). We show how these criteria apply to animal segmentation and other ontogenetic processes. We conclude by situating our proposed dynamical framework for homology of process in relation to similar research programmes, such as process structuralism and developmental approaches to morphological homology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.