Articles

Von Goethes dynamischer Pflanzenmorphologie zur evolutionären Entwicklungsbiologie («EVO-DEVO»): Holismus und Reduktionismus ergänzen sich

Herbsttagung «Evolving Morphology»
Rolf Rutishauser
Elemente der Naturwissenschaft 108, 2018, P. 80-100 | DOI: 10.18756/edn.108.80
Article | Language: German | €6.00
Export Article Citation as

Abstract:

As in other biological disciplines, there are mainly two schools of thought in plant morphology. Proponents of holism emphasize the heuristic value of complementing (seemingly contradictory) perspectives, accepting a continuum view, fuzziness and process thinking. This coincides with “as-well-as” in philosophy. Reductionists in plant morphology and other sciences appreciate crisp concepts and usually accept just one view as the right one. This way of thinking equals “either-or” in philosophy and may coincide with conceptual realism. Both methods were practiced by Goethe as poet and scientist. He moved freely between these approaches. Evolutionary developmental biology (abbreviated “EVO-DEVO”) as a modern biological discipline absorbed several aspects of Goethe’s dynamic morphology, including both schools of thought. If we really want to understand development and evolution of living organisms, it may be advantageous to accept even a kind of mystic union with plants, as already practiced by Barbara McClintock who detected jumping genes in maize.
 

References
  • Arber, A. (1946): Goethe’s Botany: The Metamorphosis of Plants (1790) and Tobler’s Ode to Nature (1782). Chronica Botanica 10, S. 63-126.
  • Arber, A. (1950): The natural philosophy of plant form. Cambridge.
  • Arber, A. (1954): The mind and the eye. A study of the biologist’s standpoint. Cambridge. Deutsche Übersetzung erschienen (1960): Sehen und Denken in der biologischen Forschung. Reinbek bei Hamburg.
  • Bortoft, H. (2012): Taking appearance seriously. The dynamic way of seeing in Goethe and European thought. Edinburgh, U.K.
  • Brakefield, P. (2011): Evo-devo and accounting for Darwin’s endless forms. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 366, S. 2069-2075.
  • Budd, G. E. (1999): Does evolution in body patterning genes drive morpho logical change or vice versa? BioEssays 21, S. 326-332.
  • Carroll, S. B. (2005): The new science of evo-devo, endless forms most beautiful. New York.
  • Classen-Bockhoff, R. (2016): The shoot concept of the flower: Still up to date? Flora 221, S. 46-53.
  • Coen, E. S. (2001): Goethe and the ABC model of flower development. C.R.Acad.Sci. 324, S. 1-8.
  • Darwin, C. (1859): The origin of species. London. Deutsche Ausgabe 1963. Die Entstehung der Arten. Stuttgart.
  • Ebach, M. C. (2005): Anschauung and the archetype: The role of Goethe’s delicate empiricism in comparative biology. Janus Head 8(1), S. 254-270.
  • Eckardt, N.A., Baum, D. (2010): The podostemad puzzle: The evolution of unusual morphology in the Podostemaceae. The Plant Cell 22, S. 2131-2140.
  • Fischer, E. P. (2000): Goethe und die Gene. Roche Magazin 65, S. 52-57.
  • Fischer, E. P. (2010): Genetisch kommt von Goethe. Die Zeit online: www. zeit.de/2010/38/Debatte-Integration-Gene; vgl. auch: www.wissen schaft.de/umwelt-natur/genetisch-kommt-nicht-von-genen-sondern von-goethe/
  • Flannery, M. C. (2003): Agnes Arber: form in the mind and the eye. Inter national Studies in the Philosophy of Science 17(3), S. 281-300.
  • Keller, E. F. (1983): A feeling for the organism. The life and work of Barbara McClintock. New York, San Francisco. Gamma, A. (in Vorbereitung): Buchprojekt «Befreiungsbiologie». http://files7.webydo.com/91/9184053/UploadedFiles/D12104DC-7985-0755 8015-D117D4ECAF3B.pdf
  • Goethe, J. W. (1790): Versuch die Metamorphose der Pflanzen zu erklären. Gotha. Neuausgabe 1960 mit Anmerkungen und Einleitung von Rudolf Steiner. Stuttgart.
  • Goto, K., Kyozuka, J., Bowman, J. L. (2001): Turning floral organs into leaves, leaves into floral organs. Current Opinion in Genetics & De velopment 11, S. 449-456.
  • Gould, S. J. (1973): Ever since Darwin. Reflections in Natural History. New York 1977.
  • Hafner, U. (2012): Im Bann der DNA. Schweiz. Nationalfonds For schungsmagazin Horizonte, S. 14-15. https://issuu.com/snsf/docs/ horizonte_95_d
  • Harrison, J. C. (2017): Development and genetics in the evolution of land plant body plans. Philosophical Transactions Royal Society B 372: 20150490. 12 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb. 2015.0490
  • Holdrege, C. (2005a): Thinking like a plant. A living science for life. Great Barr.
  • Holdrege, C. (2005a): Thinking like a plant. A living science for life. Great Barr.
  • Holdrege, C. (2005b): Doing Goethean Science. Janus Head 8, S. 27-52.
  • Holdrege, C. (2014): Goethe and the Evolution of Science. In: Context 31, S. 10-23.
  • Holdrege, C. (2016): Active thinking-perceiving. Elemente d. N. 104, S. 13-20.
  • James, P. J. (2009): «Tree and leaf»: a different angle. The Linnean 25, S. 13-19.
  • Jeune, B., Sattler, R. (1992): Multivariate analysis in process morphology. Journal of Theoretical Biology 156, S. 147-167.
  • Katayama, N., Koi, S., Kato, M. (2010): Expression of SHOOT MERIS TEMLESS, WUSCHEL, and ASYMMETRIC LEAVES1 homologs in the shoots of Podostemaceae: implications for the evolution of novel shoot organogenesis. The Plant Cell 22, S. 2131-2140.
  • Kato, M. (2013): The illustrated book of plant systematics in color: Podoste maceae of the world. Tokyo [in Japanese, with English summaries].
  • Kato, M. (2016): Multidisciplinary studies of the diversity and evolution in river-weeds. Journal of Plant Research 129(3), S. 397-410.
  • Keller, E. F. (1983): A feeling for the organism. The life and work of Barbara McClintock. New York, San Francisco.
  • Kirchoff, B. K. (2001): Character description in phylogenetic analysis: Insights from Agnes Arber’s concept of the plant. Annals of Botany 88, S. 1203-1214.
  • Kirchoff, B. K. (2002): Aspects of a Goethean science: complexity and holism in science and art. In: Rowland, H. [Hg.]: Goethe, Chaos and Complexity. Amsterdam, S. 79-89, S. 189-194.
  • Kirchoff, B. K. (2008): Emerson’s science of the spirit. A visual interpretation of Emerson’s natural history of intellect. Mebane NC.
  • Kirchoff, B.K., Pfeifer, E., Rutishauser, R. (2008): Plant structure ontology: How should we label plant structures with doubtful or mixed identities? Zootaxa 1950, S. 103-122.
  • Koi, S., Katayama, N. (2012): Gene expression analysis on enigmatic shoots in Podostemaceae. Plant Morphology 24, S. 73-80.
  • Korzybski, A. (2010): Science and Sanity: An introduction to non-Aristo telian systems and general semantics. 5th edition. Institute of General Semantics. Fort Worth (Texas). 1st edition 1948. http://esgs.free.fr/uk/ art/sands.htm
  • Lacroix, C., Jeune, B., Purcell-Macdonald, S. (2003): Shoot and compound leaf comparisons in eudicots: dynamic morphology as an alternative approach. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society 143, S. 219-230.
  • Langdale, J. A. (2008): Evolution of developmental mechanisms in plants. Current Opinion in Genetics & Development 18, S. 368-373.
  • Ledford H. (2018): Botanical renaissance. Advances in genomics and imaging are reviving a fading discipline. Nature 553, S. 396-398. www.nature.com/magazine-assets/d41586-018-01075-5/d41586-018 01075-5.pdf
  • Lei, L., Steffen, J.G., Osborne, E.J., Toomajian, C. (2017): Plant organ evolution revealed by phylotranscriptomics in Arabidopsis thaliana. Scientific Reports 7: 13 pages. DOI:10.1038/s41598-017-07866.6.
  • Meister, K. (2005): Wilhelm Troll (1897-1987). The tradition of idealistic morphology in the German Botanical Sciences of the 20th century. History and Philosophy of Life Sciences 27, S. 221-247.
  • Meyer-Abich, A. (1949): Biologische Gesetzlichkeit. In: Das Problem der Gesetzlichkeit, Band 2: Naturwissenschaften. Hamburg, S. 73-116.
  • Meyer-Abich, A. (1954): The principle of complementarity in biology. Acta Biotheoretica 11, S. 57-74.
  • Minelli, A. (2018): Plant evolutionary biology. The evolvability of the phenotype. New York.
  • Nakayama, H., Yamaguchi, T., Tsukaya, H. (2012): Acquisition and diversification of cladodes: leaf-like organs in the genus Asparagus. The Plant Cell 24, S. 929-940.
  • Nicholson, D.J., Dupré, J. [Hg.] (2017): Everything flows: Towards a pro cessual philosophy of biology. Oxford.
  • Niklas, K.J., Kutschera, U. (2017): From Goethe’s plant archetype via Haeckel’s biogenetic law to plant evo-devo 2016. Theory of Biosciences 136, S. 49-57.
  • Plantefol, L. (1949): L’ontogénie de la fleur. Paris.
  • Polianski, I. J. (2004): Die Kunst, die Natur vorzustellen. Die Aesthetisie rung der Pflanzenkunde um 1800. Minerva - Jenaer Schriften zur Kunstgeschichte 14.
  • Portmann, A. (1956): Biologie und Geist. Zürich. Taschenbuchausgabe. Frankfurt 1973.
  • Prusinkiewicz, P., Barbier de Reuille, P. (2010): Constraints of space in plant development. Journal of Experimental Botany 61, S. 2117-2129.
  • Renner, T., Lan, T., Farr, K.M. et al. (2018): Carnivorous plant genomes. In: Ellison, A.M., Adamec, L. [Hg.]: Carnivorous Plants: Physiology, ecology, and evolution. Oxford, S. 135-153.
  • Riegner, M. F. (2013): Ancestor of the new archetypal biology: Goethe’s dynamic typology as a model for contemporary evolutionary devel opmental biology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Medical Sciences 44, S. 735-744.
  • Rieppel, O. (2011): Wilhelm Troll (1897-1987): Idealistic morphology, physics, and phylogenetics. History and Philosophy of Life Sciences 33, S. 321-342.
  • Rosin, F.M., Kramer, E. M. (2009): Old dogs, new tricks: Regulatory evo lution in conserved genetic modules leads to novel morphologies in plants. Developmental Biology 332, S. 25-35.
  • Rutishauser, R. (1981): Blattstellung und Sprossentwicklung bei Blüten pflanzen. Dissertationes Botanicae 62.
  • Rutishauser R. (2005): Der Bauplan abweichend gebauter Blütenpflanzen (Misfits) - Kontinuumsmodell ergänzt klassische Pflanzenmorphologie. In: Harlan V. [Hg.]: Wert und Grenzen des Typus in der botanischen Morphologie. Nümbrecht, S. 127-148.
  • Rutishauser, R. (2016): Evolution of unusual morphologies in Lentibula riaceae (bladderworts and allies) and Podostemaceae (river-weeds). Annals of Botany 117, S. 811-832.
  • Rutishauser, R., Grob, V., Pfeifer, E. (2008): Plants are used to having identity crises. In: Minelli, A., Fusco, G. [Hg.]: Evolving pathways. Key themes in evolutionary developmental biology. Cambridge, S. 194-213.
  • Rutishauser, R., Isler, B. (2001): Developmental genetics and morphological evolution of flowering plants, especially bladderworts (Utricularia): Fuzzy Arberian Morphology complements Classical Morphology. Annals of Botany 88, S. 1173-1202.
  • Rutishauser, R., Moline, P. (2005): Evo-devo and the search for homol ogy (‘sameness‘) in biological systems. Theory in Biosciences 124, S. 213-241.
  • Rutishauser, R., Sattler, R. (1985): Complementarity and heuristic value of contrasting models in structural botany. I. General considerations. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik 107, S. 415-455.
  • Rutishauser, R., Sattler, R. (1997): Expression of shoot processes in leaf development of Polemonium caeruleum. Botanische Jahrbücher für Systematik 119, S. 563-582.
  • Sachtleben, P. (1994): Mit den Augen denken lernen. Einführung in die Naturstudien Goethes. Schaffhausen.
  • Sattler, R. (1986): Biophilosophy: analytic and holistic perspectives. Berlin.
  • Sattler, R. (1988): A dynamic multidimensional approach to floral morphol ogy. In: Leins, P., Tucker, S.C., Endress, P.K. [Hg.]: Aspects of floral development. Stuttgart. S. 1-6.
  • Sattler, R. (1992): Process morphology: structural dynamics in development and evolution. Canadian Journal of Botany 70, S. 708-714.
  • Sattler, R. (1994): Homology, homeosis, and process morphology in plants. In: Hall, B.K. [Hg.]: Homology: the hierarchical basis of comparative biology. New York, S. 423-475.
  • Sattler, R. (1996): Classical morphology and continuum morphology: op position and continuum. Annals of Botany 78, S. 577-581.
  • Sattler, R. (2001): Some comments on the morphological, scientific, philo sophical and spiritual significance of Agnes Arber’s life and work. Annals of Botany 88, S. 1215-1217.
  • Sattler, R. (2018): Philosophy of Plant Morphology. Elemente d. N. 108, S. 55-79. Sattler, R.: Beyond Wilber: www.beyondwilber.ca/about/plantmorphology/ plant_morphology.html” (Zugriff 28. Februar 2018)
  • Sattler, R., Jeune, B. (1992): Multivariate analysis confirms the continuum view of plant form. Annals of Botany 69, S. 249-262.
  • Sattler, R., Rutishauser, R. (1990): Structural and dynamic descriptions of the development of Utricularia foliosa and U. australis. Canadian Journal of Botany 68, S. 1989-2003.
  • Sattler, R., Rutishauser, R. (1997): The fundamental relevance of mor phology and morphogenesis to plant research. Annals of Botany 80, S. 571-582.
  • Schenk, H. (1886): Die Biologie der Wassergewaechse. Bonn.
  • Schilperoord-Jarke, P. (2000): Goethes Metamorphose der Pflanzen und die moderne Pflanzengenetik. In: Heusser, P. [Hg.]: Goethes Beitrag zur Er neuerung der Naturwissenschaften. Bern, Stuttgart, Wien, S. 131-168.
  • Schmitz, S. (2001): Barbara McClintock (1902-1992). In: Darwin & Co. Eine Geschichte der Biologie in Portraits. Vol. II. München, S. 490-505.
  • Soltis, D.E., Chanderbali, A.S., Kim, S., Buzgo, M., Soltis, P. S. (2007): The ABC model and its applicability to basal angiosperms. Annals of Botany 100, S. 155-163.
  • Soltis, P.S., Soltis, D. E. (2014): Flower Diversity and Angiosperm Diversi fication. In: Riechmann, J.L., Wellmer, F. [Hg.]: Flower Development. New York, Heidelberg, S. 85-102.
  • Troll, W. [Hg.] (1932): Goethes Morphologische Schriften. Jena.
  • Troll, W. (1937/1939/1941): Vergleichende Morphologie der höheren Pflan zen. Vol.1/1-3. Berlin.
  • Troll, W., Dietz, H. (1954): Morphologische und histogenetische Untersu chungen an Utricularia-Arten. Oesterreichische Botanische Zeitung 101, S. 165-207.
  • Vergara-Silva, F. (2003): Plants and the conceptual articulation of evolution ary developmental biology. Biology and Philosophy 18, S. 249-284.
  • Wagner, A. (2014): Arrival of the Fittest: Solving evolution’s greatest puzzle. London.
  • Wikipedia (2018): Plant evolutionary developmental biology: https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Plant_evolutionary_developmental_biology (Zugriff 4. Fe bruar 2018)
  • Wirz, J. (2000): Typusidee und Genetik. In: Heusser, P. [Hg.]: Goethes Beitrag zur Erneuerung der Naturwissenschaften. Bern, Stuttgart, Wien, S. 313-336.
  • Wirz, J. (2008): Nicht Baukasten, sondern Netzwerk - die Idee des Orga nismus in Genetik und Epigenetik. Elemente d. N. 88, S. 5-21.
  • Wolff, C. F. (1759): Theoria Generationis. Teil 1 & 2. Leipzig. 1896 neu herausgegeben von P. Samassa.
  • Wróblewska, M., Dolblasz, A., Zagórska-Marek, B. (2015): The role of ABC genes in shaping perianth phenotype in the basal angiosperm Magnolia. Plant Biology doi:10.1111/plb.12392
  • Wyder, M. (1998): Goethes Naturmodell. Die Scala Naturae und ihre Transformationen. Köln, Weimar, Wien.