SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • Abzhanov, A., Protas, M., Grant, B., Grant, P., and Tabin, C. 2004. Bmp4 and morphological variation of beaks in Darwin's finches. Science 305: 14621465.
  • Abzhanov, A., Kuo, W., Hartmann, C., Grant, B., Grant, P., and Tabin, C. 2006. The calmodulin pathway and evolution of integrated beak morphology in Darwin's finches. Nature 442: 563567.
  • Abzhanov, A., et al. 2008. Are we there yet? Tracking the development of new model systems. Trends Genet. 24: 353360.
  • Albertson, R., Cresko, W., Detrich, H., III, and Postlethwait, J. 2008. Evolutionary mutant models for human disease. Trends Genet. 25: 7481.
  • Amundson, R. 2005. The changing role of the embryo in evolutionary thought: roots of evo-devo. Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • Anderson, K., and Ingham, P. 2003. The transformation of the model organism: a decade of developmental genetics. Nat. Genet. Suppl. 33: 285293.
  • Ankeny, R., and Leonelli, S. 2011. What's so special about model organisms? Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. 42: 313323.
  • Blumstein, D., et al. 2010. Toward an integrative understanding of social behavior: new models and new opportunities. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 4: 19.
  • Bolker, J. A. 1995. Model systems in developmental biology. BioEssays 17: 451455.
  • Bolker, J. A. 2008. Developing a history of evo-devo. BioScience 58: 461463.
  • Bolker, J. A. 2009. Exemplary and surrogate models: two modes of representation in biology. Perspect. Biol. Med. 52: 485499.
  • Bolker, J. A. 2012. There's more to life than rats and flies. Nature 491: 3133.
  • Bolker, J. A. 2014. Models in context: biological and epistemological niches. In T. Pearce, E. Desjardins, and G. Barker (eds.). Entangled life: organism and environment in the biological and social sciences. Springer, New York, pp. 153166.
  • Burian, R. M. 1993. How the choice of experimental organism matters: epistemological reflections on an aspect of biological practice. J. Hist. Biol. 26: 351368.
  • Burian, R. M. 2005. The epistemology of development, evolution, and genetics: selected essays. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Campbell, N. 2004. This year's model? Nat. Rev. Genet. 5: 82.
  • Carroll, S., Grenier, J., and Weatherbee, S. 2005. From DNA to diversity: molecular genetics and the evolution of animal form. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA.
  • Cresko, W., McGuigan, K., Phillips, P., and Postlethwait, J. 2006. Studies of threespine stickleback developmental evolution: progress and promise. Genetica 129: 105126.
  • Darling, J., et al. 2005. Rising starlet: the starlet sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis. BioEssays 27: 211221.
  • Davis, R. 2004. The age of model organisms. Nat. Rev. Genet. 5: 6977.
  • de Beer, G. R. 1971. Homology: an unsolved problem. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Di Stilio, V. 2011. Empowering plant evo-devo: virus induced gene silencing validates new and emerging model systems. BioEssays 33: 711718.
  • Gans, C., and Northcutt, R. 1983. Neural crest and the origin of vertebrates: a new head. Science 220: 268273.
  • Gerhart, J., and Kirschner, M. 1997. Cells, embryos, and evolution: toward a cellular and developmental understanding of phenotypic variation and evolutionary adaptability. Blackwell Science, Malden, MA.
  • Gilbert, S. F. 2009. The adequacy of model systems for evo-devo: modeling the formation of organisms/modeling the formation of society. In A. Barberousse, M. Morange, and T. Pradeu (eds.). Mapping the future of biology: evolving concepts and theories. Springer, New York, pp. 57169.
  • Gilbert, S. F., and Bolker, J. A. 2001. Homologies of process: modular elements of embryonic construction. J. Exp. Zool. 291: 112.
  • Goldowitz, D., Wahlsten, D., and Wimer, R (eds). 1992. Techniques for the genetic analysis of brain and behavior: focus on the mouse. Elsevier, New York.
  • Gross, J., and Perkins, B. 2008. Zebrafish mutants as models for congenital ocular disorders in humans. Mol. Reprod. Dev. 75: 547555.
  • Haag, E. 2009. Caenorhabditis nematodes as a model for the adaptive evolution of germ cells. Curr. Top. Devel. Biol. 86: 4366.
  • Haag, E., and Pilgrim, D. 2005. Harnessing Caenorhabditis genomics for evolutionary developmental biology. Curr. Genomics 6: 579588.
  • Hall, B. 1999. The neural crest in development and evolution. Springer-Verlag, New York.
  • Hall, B. 2008. The neural crest and neural crest cells: discovery and significance for theories of embryonic organization. J. Biosci. 33: 781793.
  • Hare, B., et al. 2005. Social cognitive evolution in captive foxes is a correlated by-product of experimental domestication. Curr. Biol. 15: 226230.
  • Hedges, S. 2002. The origin and evolution of model organisms. Nat. Rev. Genet. 3: 838849.
  • Heffer, A., and Pick, L. 2013. Conservation and variation in Hox genes: how insect models pioneered the evo-devo field. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 58: 161179.
  • Hesse, M. 1963. Models and analogies in science. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN.
  • Hopwood, N. 2007. A history of normal plates, tables and stages in vertebrate embryology. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 51: 126.
  • Jenner, R. 2006. Unburdening evo-devo: ancestral attractions, model organisms, and basal baloney. Dev. Genes Evol. 216: 385394.
  • Jenner, R., and Wills, M. 2007. The choice of model organisms in evo-devo. Nat. Rev. Genet. 8: 311319.
  • Johnson, R., et al. 2010. Cross-species genomics matches driver mutations and cell compartments to model ependymoma. Nature 466: 632636.
  • Jones, F., et al. 2012. The genomic basis of adaptive evolution in threespine sticklebacks. Nature 484: 5561.
  • Joyce, A. R., and Palsson, B. Q. 2006. The model organism as a system: integrating 'omics' data sets. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 7: 198210.
  • Kellogg, E. A., and Shaffer, H. B. 1993. Model organisms in evolutionary studies. Syst. Biol. 42: 409414.
  • Kingsley, E., Manceau, M., Wiley, C., and Hoekstra, H. 2009. Melanism in Peromyscus is caused by independent mutations in Agouti. PLoS ONE 4: e6435. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0006435
  • Kohler, R. 1993. Drosophila: a life in the laboratory. J. Hist. Biol. 26: 281310.
  • Kortschak, R., Samuel, G., Saint, R., and Miller, D. 2003. EST analysis of the cnidarian Acropora millepora reveals extensive gene loss and rapid sequence divergence in the model invertebrates. Curr. Biol. 13: 21902195.
  • Krauss, R. (eds.). 2008. Mouse models of developmental genetic disease. Elsevier, New York.
  • Krebs, H. A. 1975. The August Krogh Principle: for many problems there is an animal on which it can be most conveniently studied. J. Exp. Zool. 194: 221226.
  • Krogh, A. 1929. Progress in physiology. Am. J. Physiol. 90: 243251.
  • Laubichler, M., and Maienschein, J. (eds.). 2007. From embryology to evo-devo: a history of developmental evolution. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Ledent, V., and Vervoort, M. 2001. The basic helix-loop-helix protein family: comparative genomics and phylogenetic analysis. Genome Res. 11: 754770.
  • Lederman, M., and Burian, R. M. 1993. Introduction: the right organism for the job. J. Hist. Biol. 26: 235238.
  • Linnen, C., et al. 2013. Adaptive evolution of multiple traits through multiple mutations at a single gene. Science 339: 13121316.
  • Lockard, R. 1968. The albino rat: a defensible choice or a bad habit? Am. Psychol. 23: 734742.
  • Love, A. 2010. Idealization in evolutionary developmental investigation: a tension between phenotypic plasticity and normal stages. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Ser. B 365: 679690.
  • Love, A., and Raff, R. 2003. Knowing your ancestors: themes in the history of evo-devo. Evol. Dev. 5: 327330.
  • Love, A., and Travisano, R. 2013. Microbes modeling ontogeny. Biol. Philos. 28(2): 161188.
  • Mabee, P. 2006. Integrating evolution and development: the need for bioinformatics in evo-devo. BioScience 56: 301309.
  • Mabee, P., et al. 2007. Connecting evolutionary morphology to genomics using ontologies: a case study from cypriniformes including zebrafish. J. Exp. Zool. 308B: 114.
  • Mabee, P., et al. 2012. 500,000 Fish phenotypes: the new informatics landscape for evolutionary and developmental biology of the vertebrate skeleton. J. Appl. Ichthyol. 28: 300305.
  • Maher, B. 2009. Biology's next top model? Nature 458: 695698.
  • Mallarino, R., Grant, P., Grant, B., Herrel, A., Kuo, W., and Abzhanov, A. 2011. Two developmental modules establish 3D beak-shape variation in Darwin's finches. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 108: 40574062.
  • Manceau, M., Domingues, V., Mallarino, R., and Hoekstra, H. 2011. The developmental role of Agouti in color pattern evolution. Science 331: 10621065.
  • McGraw, L., and Young, L. 2010. The prairie vole: an emerging model organism for understanding the social brain. Trends Neurosci. 33: 103109.
  • Metscher, B., and Ahlberg, P. E. 1999. Zebrafish in context: uses of a laboratory model in comparative studies. Dev. Biol. 210: 114.
  • Mikhailov, A., and Gilbert, S. 2002. From development to evolution: the re-establishment of the “Alexander Kowalevsky Medal”. Int. J. Dev. Biol. 46: 693698.
  • Montalta-He, H., and Reichert, H. 2003. Impressive expressions: developing a systematic database of gene-expression patterns in Drosophila embryogenesis. Genome Biol. 4: 205208.
  • Müller, G. 2001. Evo-devo: extending the evolutionary synthesis. Nat. Rev. Genet. 8: 943949.
  • Mushegian, A., Garey, J., Martin, J., and Liu, L. 1998. Large-scale taxonomic profiling of eukaryotic model organisms: a comparison of orthologous proteins encoded by the human, fly, nematode, and yeast genomes. Genome Res. 8: 590598.
  • Nijhout, H. F. 1991. The development and evolution of butterfly wing patterns. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
  • O'Malley, M., Elliott, K., Haufe, C., and Burian, R. 2009. Philosophies of funding. Cell 138: 611615.
  • Patel, N. 2012. Evolutionary crossroads in developmental biology. Development 139: 26372638.
  • Peregrin-Alvarez, J., Tsoka, S., and Ouzounis, C. 2003. The phylogenetic extent of metabolic enzymes and pathways. Genome Res. 13: 422427.
  • Raff, R. A. 1996. The shape of life. Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL.
  • Raff, R., and Byrne, M. 2006. The active evolutionary lives of echinoderm larvae. Heredity 97: 244252.
  • Raff, R., and Love, A. 2004. Kowalevsky, comparative evolutionary embryology, and the intellectual lineage of evo-devo. J. Exp. Zool. 302B: 1934.
  • Rajakumar, R., et al. 2012. Ancestral developmental potential facilitates parallel evolution in ants. Science 335: 7982.
  • Riddle, D., Blumenthal, T., Meyer, B., and Priess, J. (eds.). 1997. C. elegans II. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Plainview, NY.
  • Robert, J. 2004. Embryology, epigenesis, and evolution: taking development seriously. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Robinson, R. 1965. Genetics of the Norway rat. Pergamon Press, New York.
  • Russell, W., and Burch, R. 1959. The principles of humane experimental technique. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL.
  • Sanger, T., Revell, L., Gibson-Brown, J., and Losos, J. 2012. Repeated modification of early limb morphogenesis programmes underlies the convergence of relative limb length in Anolis lizards. Proc. R. Soc. Ser. B 279: 739748.
  • Schaffner, K. 1993. Discovery and explanation in biology and medicine. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
  • Schaffner, K. 2001. Extrapolation from animal models: social life, sex, and super models. In P. Machamer, R. Grush, and P. McLaughlin (eds.). Theory and method in the neurosciences. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp. 200230.
  • Schlichting, C., and Pigliucci, M. 1998. Phenotypic evolution: a reaction norm approach. Sinauer Associates, Inc., Sunderland, MA.
  • Shaffer, H. 1984. Evolution in a paedomorphic lineage. Evolution 38: 11941206.
  • Sommer, R. 2009. The future of evo-devo: model systems and evolutionary theory. Nat. Rev. Genet. 10: 416422.
  • Steel, D. 2008. Across the boundaries: extrapolation in biology and social science. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Stölting, K., and Wilson, A. 2007. Male pregnancy in seahorses and pipefish: beyond the mammalian model. BioEssays 29: 884896.
  • Tautz, D. 2011. Not just another genome. BMC Biol. 9: 8.
  • Toth, A., and Robinson, G. 2007. Evo-devo and the evolution of social behavior. Trends Genet. 23: 334341.
  • Toth, A., and Robinson, G. 2009. Evo-devo and the evolution of social behavior: brain gene expression analyses in social insects. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. LXXIV: 18.
  • Trut, L., Oskina, I., and Kharlamova, A. 2009. Animal evolution during domestication: the domesticated fox as a model. BioEssays 31: 349360.
  • Tulin, S., Aguiar, D., Istrail, S., and Smith, J. 2013. A quantitative reference transcriptome for Nematostella vectensis early embryonic development: a pipeline for de novo assembly in emerging model systems. Evol. Dev. 4: 16.
  • Tyndall, J. 1870. Essays on the use and limit of the imagination in science. Longmans, Green, and Co., London.
  • Venton, D. 2012. Our reptilian brethren: mammals and live-bearing lizards show similar pregnancy mechanisms. Genome Biol. Evol. 4: 372373.
  • Vera, J., et al. 2008. Rapid transcriptome characterization for a nonmodel organism using 454 pyrosequencing. Mol. Ecol. 17: 16361647.
  • Weber, J., Peterson, B., and Hoekstra, H. 2013. Discrete genetic modules are responsible for complex burrow evolution in Peromyscus mice. Nature 493: 402406.
  • West-Eberhardt, M. 2003. Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Wilkins, A. 2001. Why the philosophy of science actually does matter. BioEssays 23: 12.
    Direct Link:
  • Yanai, I., Peshkin, L., Jorgensen, P., and Kirschner, M. 2011. Mapping gene expression in two Xenopus species: evolutionary constraints and developmental flexibility. Dev. Cell 20: 483496.
  • Yang, H., et al. 2011. Subspecific origin and haplotype diversity in the laboratory mouse. Nat. Genet. 43: 648655.