Examples proving the law of Müller and Haeckel. Onto-phylogenetic relationship

The Haeckel-Muller biogenetic law describes the relationship observed in living nature - ontogenesis, that is, the personal development of each living organism, to a certain extent it repeats phylogeny - the historical development of the entire group of individuals to which it belongs. The law was formulated, as the name implies, and F. Müller in the 60s of the XIX century independently of each other, and it is almost impossible to establish the discoverer of the theory now.

Obviously, the biogenetic law was not immediately formulated. The work of Müller and Haeckel was preceded by the creation of a theoretical basis for the law in the form of already discovered phenomena and other established laws of nature. In 1828 K. Baer formulated the so-called law of embryonic similarity. Its essence lies in the fact that the embryos of individuals belonging to the same biological type, have many similar elements of the anatomical structure. In humans, for example, at a certain stage of development, the embryo has gill slits and a tail. Characteristic distinctive features in the morphology of species arise only in the course of further ontogenesis. The law of embryonic similarity largely determined the biogenetic law: since the embryos of different organisms repeat the stages of development of other individuals, they repeat the stages of development of the entire type in general.

A.N. Severtsov later made certain amendments to the Haeckel-Muller law. The scientist noted that during embryogenesis, that is, the stage, there is a similarity between the organs of embryos, and not adults. Thus, the gill slits are similar to the branchial slits of fish embryos, but not in any way with the formed gills of adult fish.

It is important to note that one of the most significant proofs of the Darwinian theory of evolution is the biogenetic law itself. Its formulation itself hints at its own logical connection with the teachings of Darwin. The embryo in the course of its development passes through many different stages, each of which resembles certain stages of development of nature, noted from an evolutionary point of view. Thus, each more and more complexly organized individual reflects in its ontogeny the development of all living nature from the point of view of evolution.

Psychology also has its own biogenetic law, formulated independently of the biological one. In fact, in psychology, it is not a formalized law that stands out, but the idea expressed by I. Herbart and T. Ziller about the similarity of the development of the child's psyche with that of humanity in general. Various scholars have tried to substantiate this theory from different points of view. H. Hall, for example, resorted directly to the Haeckel-Muller law. He talked about the fact that the development of a child, including psychologically, is set exclusively biological prerequisites and repeats evolutionary development in general. One way or another, today the idea is not unequivocally proven. In psychology, there is still no biogenetic law as such.

German zoologist working in Brazil in 1864 Fritz Müller wrote in his book: "... the historical development of the species will be reflected in the history of its individual development."

In two years Ernst Haeckel gave a more general formulation:

“Ontogenesis (term by E. Haeckel) is the recapitulation of phylogenesis (in many translations -“ Ontogeny is a rapid and brief repetition of phylogenesis ”).

Or: those stages through which a living organism passes in the process of its development, in a condensed form, repeat the evolutionary history of its species.

Attempts were repeatedly made to extend the biogenetic law to the development of the human psyche ...

Modern addition:

“At present, according to the majority of scientists, the law does not have an absolute meaning, and the structure of the embryo does not correspond in all details to the structure of the ancestor.

The earlier a hereditary change deviates from the normal, parental path of development, the more significantly the structure of the adult organism will change, the less likely this change will be adaptive and remain in the selection process. Therefore, changes in the final stages of development (superstructure or anabolism) occur in evolution more often than deviations (changes in the middle stages) and arhallaxis (changes in the initial stages).

The initial stages of development are more conservative and therefore in many cases can be evidence of kinship and indicate the stages passed in the process of evolution. "

Dictionary of genetic terms / Comp .: M.V. Supotnitsky, M., "University book", 2007, p. 180.

Biogenetic law

The law and its meaning
Criticism
What have we learned?

Test by topic

The law and its meaning

The essence of the law is that in the process of ontogenesis (individual development of the organism), an individual repeats the forms of its ancestors and from conception to formation goes through the stages of phylogenesis ( historical development organisms).

The formulation of the zoologist Fritz Müller was given in the book "For Darwin" in 1864. Müller wrote that the historical development of a species is reflected in the history of individual development.

Two years later, naturalist Ernst Haeckel formulated the law more succinctly: ontogeny is a rapid repetition of phylogeny. In other words, every organism undergoes an evolutionary change in species during development.

Rice. 1. Haeckel and Müller.

Scientists made their conclusions when studying embryos of different types on the basis of a number of similar signs. For example, branchial arches form in the embryos of mammals and fish. Embryos of amphibians, reptiles and mammals go through the same developmental stages and are similar in appearance. The similarity of embryos is one of the proofs of the theory of evolution and the origin of animals from one ancestor.

Rice. 2. Comparison of embryos of different animals.

The founder of embryology, Karl Baer, back in 1828, revealed the similarity of embryos of different species. He wrote that the embryos are identical and only at a certain stage of embryological development do the characteristics of the genus and species appear. Curiously, despite his observations, Baer never accepted the theory of evolution.

Since the 19th century, Haeckel and Müller's conclusions have been criticized.
Imperfections of the basic biogenetic law were identified:

the individual does not repeat all stages of evolution and goes through the stages of historical development in a concise form;
the similarity is observed not in embryos and adults, but in two different embryos at a certain stage of development (the gills of mammals are similar to the gills of fish embryos, not adults);
neoteny is a phenomenon in which the adult stage resembles the larval development of the alleged ancestor (preservation of infant properties throughout life);
pedogenesis - a type of parthenogenesis in which reproduction occurs at the larval stage;
significant differences at the stages of blastula and gastrula in vertebrates, similarity is observed at later stages.

It has been established that the Haeckel-Muller law is never fully satisfied, there are always deviations and exceptions. Some embryologists have noted that the biogenetic law is just an illusion that does not have any serious prerequisites.

The law was revised by biologist Alexei Severtsov. On the basis of the biogenetic law, he developed the theory of phylembryogenesis. According to the hypothesis, changes in historical development are caused by changes in the larval or embryonic stage of development, i.e. ontogeny changes phylogeny.

Severtsov divided the characters of embryos into cenogenesis (adaptation to the larval or embryonic way of life) and phylembryogenesis (changes in embryos that lead to modification of adults).

Severtsov attributed to cenogenesis:

embryonic membranes;
placenta;
egg tooth;
gills of amphibian larvae;
attachment organs in larvae.

Rice. 3. The egg tooth is an example of coenogenesis.

Cenogenesis made life easier for larvae and embryos in the course of evolution. Therefore, it is difficult to trace the development of phylogenesis by embryological development.

Phylembryogenesis is divided into three types:

arhallaxis - changes in the first stages of ontogenesis, in which the further development of the organism follows a new path;
anabolism - an increase in ontogenesis through the emergence of additional stages of embryonic development;
deviation - changes in the middle stages of development.

What have we learned?

From the 9th grade biology lesson, we learned about the Haeckel-Muller law, according to which each individual passes through the stages of phylogeny during ontogeny. The law does not work in its "pure" form and has a lot of assumptions. Biologist Severtsov developed a more complete theory of individual development.

Biogenetic law of Haeckel-Müller

The formulation of the Haeckel-Müller biogenetic law, its connection with Darwinism and conflicting facts. Fertilization and development of the human embryo. Scientific criticism of the biogenetic law and further development of the theory of the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny.

Biogenetic law of F. Müller (1864) and E. Haeckel (1866), law of irreversibility of evolution by L. Dollo (1893) law of oligomerization of V. A. Dogel 91936). Illustrate them with examples

The Merchant Shipping Code of Ukraine regulates relations that arise during merchant shipping.

Merchant shipping in this Code means activities associated with the use of ships for the carriage of goods, passengers, baggage and mail, fish and other marine fisheries, exploration and extraction of minerals, towing, icebreaking and rescue operations, cable laying, as well as for other economic , scientific and cultural purposes

The first laws of evolutionary development - J.B. Lamarck (1809), J. Cuvier (1812), Milen_Edwards (1851). Illustrate them with examples

biogenetic law: in the process of individual development (ontogeny), each organism briefly repeats the sign of the periods T and phylogeny. recapitulation: the repetition of signs occurs only during the period of embryogenesis of development.
example: nauplius-larva-crustaceans
melinegrid crayfish-bag with globular cells

evolutions, like any development, is an irreversible phenomenon, if an organ is exhausted, it will never re-solder, even if necessary, another organ will appear, of a different origin as it will perform the required function.
example: heat crustaceans-limb alterations
heat is calculated in the air - in the aquatic environment

Biogenetic law of F. Müller (1864) and E. Haeckel (1866), law of irreversibility of evolution by L. Dollo (1893) law of oligomerization of V. A. Dogel 91936). Illustrate them with examples.

2. Biogenetic law of Haeckel-Müller (also known under the names "Haeckel's law", "Müller-Haeckel's law", "Darwin-Müller-Haeckel's law", "basic biogenetic law"): every living being in its individual development (ontogenesis) repeats to a certain extent the forms passed by his ancestors or his species (phylogeny).

Played important role in the history of the development of science, however, at present, in its original form, it is not recognized as modern biological science... By modern interpretation of the biogenetic law, proposed by the Russian biologist A.N.Severtsov at the beginning of the 20th century, in ontogeny there is a repetition of the characteristics not of adult individuals of ancestors, but of their embryos.
examples:
In the tadpole, as in lower fish and fish fry, the notochord serves as the basis of the skeleton, only later in the body part is overgrown with cartilaginous vertebrae. The skull of the tadpole is cartilaginous, and well-developed cartilaginous arches adjoin it; breath is gill. The circulatory system is also built according to the fish type: the atrium has not yet divided into right and left halves, only venous blood enters the heart, and from there it goes through the arterial trunk to the gills. If the development of the tadpole stopped at this stage and did not go further, we would have to attribute such an animal to the superclass of fish without any hesitation.
And while in a chicken embryo, by the end of the first week, both the hind and front limbs have the appearance of identical legs, while the tail has not yet disappeared, and feathers have not yet formed from the papillae, by all its characteristics it stands closer to reptiles than to adult birds.
Oligomerization
Discovered by V.A. Dogel
As differentiation occurs, oligomerization of organs occurs: they acquire a certain localization, and their number decreases more and more (with progressive morphophysiological differentiation of the remaining ones) and becomes constant for this group of animals.
[edit] Examples
New organs in phylogenesis can arise, for example, due to:
lifestyle changes
transition from a sedentary lifestyle to an active one
from aquatic to terrestrial
For the type of annelids, the segmentation of the body has a multiple, unsteady character, all segments are homogeneous.
In arthropods (descended from annelids), the number of segments is:
in most classes is reduced
becomes permanent
individual body segments, usually grouped together (head, chest, abdomen, etc.), specialize in performing certain functions.

L. Dollo's law of irreversibility of evolution is a law according to which an organism (population, species) cannot return to the previous state, already realized in a number of its ancestors, even after returning to their habitat.

Dollo's law of irreversibility of evolution.
AR Wallace also, independently of Darwin, came to the conclusion that evolution is irreversible. L. Dollo in 1893 formulated the law on the irreversibility of evolution in the following way: “An organism, either as a whole, or even in part, can not return to a state that has already been realized in a number of its ancestors.”

The Belgian paleontologist L. Dollot formulated the general position that evolution is an irreversible process. This position was then repeatedly confirmed and received the name Dollo's law. The author himself gave a very brief formulation of the law of the irreversibility of evolution. He was not always correctly understood and sometimes aroused not entirely justified objections. According to Dollo, "the organism cannot return, even partially, to the previous state, already realized in a number of its ancestors."

O. Abel gives the following, more extensive formulation of Dollot's law:

“An organ, reduced in the course of historical development, never reaches its previous level again; a completely disappeared organ is never restored "
“If adaptation to a new way of life (for example, during the transition from walking to climbing) is accompanied by the loss of organs that were of great functional importance in the previous way of life, then with a new return to the old way of life these organs never arise again; instead of them, a replacement is created by other bodies "

The law of irreversibility of evolution should not be extended beyond the limits of its applicability. Terrestrial vertebrates descend from fish, and the five-toed limb is the result of the transformation of the paired fin of a fish, Terrestrial vertebrates can return to life in water, and the five-toed limb at the same time acquires general form fin. Internal structure fin-shaped limb - the flipper retains, however, the main features of a five-fingered limb, and does not return to the original structure of the fish fin. Amphibians breathe with lungs, they have lost the gill breath of their ancestors. Some amphibians returned to permanent life in the water and regained gill respiration. Their gills are, however, larval external gills. Internal fish-type gills have disappeared irrevocably. In primates climbing trees, the first toe is reduced to a certain extent. In humans, descended from climbing primates, the first toe of the lower (hind) limbs underwent significant progressive development again (in connection with the transition to walking on two legs), but did not return to some initial state, but acquired a completely peculiar shape, position and development.

Consequently, not to mention the fact that progressive development is often replaced by regression, and regression is sometimes replaced by new progress. However, development never goes back along the path already traversed, and it never leads to a complete restoration of previous states.

Indeed, organisms, passing into their former habitat, do not completely return to their ancestral state. Ichthyosaurs (reptiles) have adapted to living in water. However, their organization remained typically reptilian. The same goes for crocodiles. Mammals living in water (whales, dolphins, walruses, seals) have retained all the features characteristic of this class of animals.

Biogenetic law of Haeckel-Müller, its interpretation by Severtsov. Palingenesis and cenogenesis

F. Müller in his work "For Darwin" (1864) formulated the idea that changes in ontogenetic development that underlie the process of evolution can be expressed in changes in the early or late stages of organ development. In the first case, only the general similarity of young embryos is preserved. In the second case, there is an extension and complication of ontogenesis associated with the extension of stages and the repetition (recapitulation) in the individual development of the traits of more distant adult ancestors. Müller's work served as the basis for the formulation of E. Haeckel (1866) basic biogenetic law, according to which ontogeny is a short and rapid repetition of phylogeny. That is, an organic individual repeats, during a fast and short course of its individual development, the most important of those changes in form that its ancestors went through during the slow and long course of their paleontological development according to the laws of heredity and variability. Signs of adult ancestors, which are repeated in the embryogenesis of descendants, he called palingenesis. Adaptations to embryonic or larval stages are called cenogenesis.

However, Haeckel's views were very different from those of Müller in the question of the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny in the process of evolution. Müller believed that evolutionarily new forms arise by changing the course of individual development characteristic of their ancestors, i.e. changes in ontogeny are primary in relation to phylogenetic changes. According to Haeckel, on the contrary, phylogenetic changes precede changes in individual development. Evolutionarily new characters do not arise during ontogenesis, but in an adult organism. An adult organism evolves, and in the process of this evolution the characters shift to earlier stages of ontogenesis.

Thus, the problem of the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny arose, which has not been resolved to this day.

The interpretation of the biogenetic law in the understanding of Müller was later developed by A.N. Severtsov (1910-1939) in the theory of phylembryogenesis. Severtsov shared Müller's views on the primacy of ontogenetic changes in relation to changes in adult organisms and considered ontogenesis not only as a result of phylogenesis, but also as its basis. Ontogeny is not only lengthened by adding stages: it is all rearranged in the process of evolution; it has its own history, which is naturally connected with the history of the adult organism and partially determines it.

BIOGENETIC LAW(Greek, bios life genetikos referring to birth, origin) - a set of theoretical generalizations that describe the relationship between the individual and historical development of living organisms.

B. z. was formulated in 1866 by him. zoologist E. Haeckel: “The series of forms through which an individual organism passes during its development, starting from the ovum and ending with a fully developed state, is a short, condensed repetition of a long series of forms passed by the animal ancestors of the same organism, or generic forms of its species, since ancient times, the so-called. organic creation, up to the present time ", ie," ontogeny is a rapid and brief repetition of phylogeny. "

The basis for the creation of B. z. the work of F. Müller "For Darwin" (1864), in which it was shown that phylogenetically new characters of adult organisms arise as a result of changes in ontogeny in descendants - lengthening or deviation from ontogeny of ancestors, was served. In both cases, the structure of the adult organism changes.

According to Haeckel, phylogenesis occurs by summing up the changes in an adult organism and shifting them to earlier stages of ontogenesis, i.e., phylogeny is the basis for ontogenesis, to which the role of an abbreviated and distorted record of evolutionary transformations of adult organisms is assigned (see Ontogeny, Phylogenesis) ... From these positions, Haeckel divided all the signs of a developing organism into two categories: palingenesis (see) - with

signs or stages of individual development, repeating or recapitulating in the ontogeny of descendants stages of phylogenesis of adult ancestors, and cenogenesis - any signs that violate recapitulation. Haeckel believed that the cause of cenogenesis was the secondary adaptations of organisms to the conditions in which their ontogenesis proceeds. Therefore, temporary (provisional) adaptations were attributed to cenogenesis, which ensure the survival of an individual at certain stages of individual development and are absent in an adult organism, for example, the embryonic membranes of the fetus (actually cenogenesis), as well as changes in the initiation of organs in time (heterochrony) or place (heterotopies) and secondary changes in the path of ontogenesis of this organ. All these transformations disrupt palingenesis and thus complicate the use of embryological data for the reconstruction of phylogenesis, for which, as shown by A. N. Severtsov (1939), Haeckel was formulated by B. z.

At the beginning of the 20th century. a number of authors proved that F. Muller, who postulated the emergence of phylogenetic changes as a result of transformations of ontogenetic processes, more correctly than Haeckel, explained the relationship between individual and historical development, substantiated at the present time from the standpoint of genetics. Since evolution takes place in a number of generations, only generative mutations that change the hereditary apparatus of gametes or zygotes are important in it. Only these mutations are passed on to the next generation, in which they change the course of ontogenesis, due to which they appear in the phenotype of the offspring. If in the next generation ontogenesis proceeds in the same way as in the previous one, then the adult organisms of both generations will be the same.

Based on the idea of the primacy of ontogenetic changes, A.N.Severtsov developed the theory of phylembryogenesis - a description of the methods (modes) of evolutionary changes in the course of ontogenesis, which lead to the transformation of the organs of descendants. The most common way of progressive organ evolution is anabolism, or end-stage extension. In this case, to the stage at which the development of the organ in the ancestors ended, a new one is added (lengthening of ontogeny), and the final stage of ontogenesis of the ancestors appears to be shifted to the beginning of development:

Anabolias E, F, G, H lead to the further development of the organ and cause the recapitulation of ancestral states (e, f, g). Consequently, it is during evolution by anabolism that the palingenetic path of ontogenesis arises, but in this case there is not a shift in the stages of ontogeny, but the further phylogenetic development of an organ that already existed in the ancestors.

The second mode of phylembryogenesis is deviation, or deviation at intermediate stages of development. In this case, the development of the organ of the descendants begins in the same way as in the ancestors, but then it changes direction, although additional stages do not arise:

Deviation rearranges ontogenesis, starting from intermediate stages (c1, d2, d3), which leads to a change in the definitive structure of the organ (E1, E2, E3). Recapitulation in abc1d1E1 ontogeny is traced at ab stages, and in abc1d3E3 ontogeny - at abc1 stages. The third, most rare, mode of progressive evolution is arhallaxis, or a change in the primary rudiments of organs:

Arhallaxis is characterized by the transformation of the earliest stages of ontogenesis, starting with its initiation (a1, a2, a3), which can lead to the emergence of new organs that were absent in the ancestors (E1, E2, E3) - the primary arhallaxis, or to a radical restructuring of the ontogeny of an organ without significant changes in its definitive structure - secondary arhallaxis. With this method of evolution, there is no recapitulation.

Evolutionary organ reduction also occurs through phylembryogenesis. There are two types of reduction: rudimentation (underdevelopment) and aphanisia (disappearance without a trace). During rudimentation, an organ normally developed and functioning in the ancestors loses its functional significance in the descendants. In this case, according to A. N. Severtsov, the reduction is carried out by negative arhallaxis: the establishment in the offspring is smaller and weaker than in the ancestors, develops more slowly and does not reach the ancestral definitive stage. As a result, the organ of the descendants turns out to be underdeveloped. With aphania, the reducing organ not only loses its functional significance, but also becomes harmful to the body. Ontogenesis of such an organ, as a rule, begins and for a certain time proceeds in the same way as in the ancestors, but then negative anabolism occurs - the organ is absorbed, and the process goes in the reverse order of development, until the anlage itself disappears.

The theory of phylembryogenesis is close to the ideas of Müller. However, A. N. Severtsov singled out the modus of arhallaxis, which can be observed only during evolutionary transformations of parts, and not of the whole organism, studied by Müller. Soviet biologists have proved that not only organs, but also tissues and cells of multicellular organisms evolve through phylembryogenesis. There is evidence of evolution by phylembryogenesis not only of developed organs, but also provisional adaptations (cenogenesis). It was also found that in a number of cases, heterochronies are important phylembryogenesis.

Thus, phylembryogenesis is universal mechanism phylogenetic transformations of the structure of organisms at all levels (from cell to organism) and stages of ontogenesis. At the same time, phylembryogenesis cannot be considered primary and elementary evolutionary changes. As is known, evolution is based on mutational variability. Both phylembryogenesis and generative mutations are inherited and manifested during ontogenesis. However, mutational variability, in contrast to phylembryogenesis, is individual (each new mutation is characteristic only of the individual in which it arose), and the mutational changes that appear for the first time are not of an adaptive nature. Phylembryogenesis, in all likelihood, are complexes of mutations that have passed natural selection and have become the genotypic norm. In this case, phylembryogenesis is a secondary transformation arising as a result of the preservation and accumulation of mutations that change morphogenesis (see), and thereby the formation of adult organisms in accordance with changes in the environment. Natural selection more often preserves changes that only build on ontogenesis, less often - changing intermediate stages, and even less often - transforming morphogenesis from its very first stages. This explains the different incidence of anabolias, deviations and arhallaxis. Consequently, phylembryogenesis, being a mechanism for the formation of phylogenetically new characters, is at the same time the result of mutational restructuring of individual development.

Haeckel's ideas about the predominance of phylogenetic changes over ontogenetic ones and Müller's about the primacy of the rearrangement of the course of ontogenesis, leading to phylogenetic changes in the structure of organisms, are one-sided and do not reflect the entire complexity of the evolutionary relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny. From modern positions, the connection between the individual and historical development of an organism is expressed as follows: "phylogeny is a historical series of known ontogenesis" (II Shmalgauzen, 1969), where each subsequent ontogenesis differs from the previous one.

Bibliography: Lebedin S.N. Sci. in-ta them. Lesgaft, v. 20, no. 1, p. 103, 1936; Müller F. and Haeckel E. Basic biogenetic law, trans. from it., M. - L., 1940; Sever tsov A. N. Morphological patterns of evolution, p. 453, M.-L., 1939; Severtsov A. S. On the question of the evolution of ontogeny, Zh. total biol., t. 31, no. 2, p. 222, 1970; Shm and lg and u-zen II Problems of Darwinism, p. 318, L., 1969.

xn - 90aw5c.xn - c1avg

Biogenetic Law [Haeckel-Müller]

Biogenetic law of Haeckel-Müller speaks of a brief repetition of phylogeny in ontogeny. This law was discovered in the second half of the 19th century. German scientists E. Haeckel and F. Müller.

The biogenetic law is reflected in the development of many representatives of the animal world. So, the tadpole repeats the stage of development of fish, which are the ancestors of amphibians. The biogenetic law is also true for plants. For example, at the seedlings of cultivated varieties of cotton, first integral lamellar leaves appear, from which two-, three-, four-, five-lobed leaves then develop. In wild cotton species G. raimondii and G. klotzschianum, the leaves on the stem are a solid plate. Consequently, the cultivated varieties of cotton in the process of their individual development briefly repeat the historical development of their ancestors.

However, in the process of individual development, not all are repeated, but only some of the stages of the historical development of the ancestors, while the rest drop out. This is due to the fact that the historical development of the ancestors lasts for millions of years, and the individual development takes a short time. In addition, in ontogeny, not the stages of adult forms of ancestors are repeated, but their embryonic stages of development.

Philembryogenesis theory

Naturally, the question arises: if phylogeny influences ontogenesis, then can ontogeny influence phylogeny? It should be emphasized that in ontogeny not only some stages of the development of ancestors drop out, but also changes occur that were not observed in phylogeny. This was proved by the Russian scientist A. N. Severtsov with his theory of phylembryogenesis. Material from the site http://wikiwhat.ru

It is known that mutational variability occurs at different stages of an individual's embryonic development. Organisms with beneficial mutations survive in the struggle for existence and natural selection, passing beneficial mutations from generation to generation, and, in the end, change the course of phylogeny. For example, in reptiles, the cells of the epithelium of the skin, and underneath the connective tissue, develop, form scales. And in mammals, the derivatives of epithelial and connective tissue, changing, form a hair sac under the skin.

Biogenetic law

Biogenetic law Haeckel-Mueller (also known under the names "Haeckel's law", "Muller-Haeckel's law", "Darwin-Mueller-Haeckel's law", "basic biogenetic law"): every living creature in its individual development (ontogenesis) repeats to a certain extent forms passed by his ancestors or his species (phylogeny).

He played an important role in the history of the development of science, but at present in his original form not recognized by modern biological science. According to the modern interpretation of the biogenetic law, proposed by the Russian biologist A.N. Severtsov at the beginning of the 20th century, in ontogeny there is a repetition of the traits not of adult individuals of ancestors, but of their embryos.

History of creation

In fact, the "biogenetic law" was formulated long before the rise of Darwinism.

German anatomist and embryologist Martin Rathke (1793-1860) in 1825 described gill slits and arches in mammalian and avian embryos - one of the most striking examples of recapitulation [ source not specified 469 days] .

In 1824-1826, Etienne Serra formulated the "Meckel-Serre law of parallelism": each organism in its embryonic development repeats the adult forms of more primitive animals [ source not specified 469 days] .

In 1828, Karl Maksimovich Baer, based on Rathke's data and on the results of his own research on the development of vertebrates, formulated the law of embryonic similarity: “Embryos successively pass in their development from common features type to more and more special features. Later, signs develop indicating that the embryo belongs to a certain genus, species, and, finally, development ends with the appearance characteristic features this individual. " Baer did not give this "law" an evolutionary meaning (until the end of his life he did not accept evolutionary teaching Darwin), but later this law came to be regarded as "embryological evidence of evolution" (see Macroevolution) and evidence of the origin of animals of the same type from a common ancestor.

The "biogenetic law" as a consequence of the evolutionary development of organisms was first formulated (rather vaguely) by the English naturalist Charles Darwin in his book "The Origin of Species" in 1859: , in his adult or personal state, of all members of the same large class "(Darwin C. Soch. M.-L., 1939, vol. 3, p. 636.)

2 years before Ernst Haeckel's formulation of the biogenetic law, a similar formulation was proposed by the German zoologist Fritz Müller, who worked in Brazil, on the basis of his research on the development of crustaceans. In his book "For Darwin" (Für Darwin), published in 1864, he emphasizes in italics the idea: "the historical development of a species will be reflected in the history of its individual development."

A short aphoristic formulation of this law was given by the German natural scientist Ernst Haeckel in 1866. The short formulation of the law is as follows: Ontogeny is the recapitulation of phylogeny(in many translations - "Ontogeny is a quick and short repetition of phylogeny").

Examples of the implementation of the biogenetic law

A striking example of the fulfillment of the biogenetic law is the development of a frog, which includes the stage of a tadpole, which in its structure is much more similar to fish than to amphibians:

In the tadpole, as in lower fish and fish fry, the notochord serves as the basis of the skeleton, only later in the body part is overgrown with cartilaginous vertebrae. The skull of the tadpole is cartilaginous, and well-developed cartilaginous arches adjoin it; breath is gill. The circulatory system is also built according to the fish type: the atrium has not yet divided into right and left halves, only venous blood enters the heart, and from there it goes through the arterial trunk to the gills. If the development of the tadpole stopped at this stage and did not go further, we would have to attribute such an animal to the superclass of fish without any hesitation.

The embryos not only of amphibians, but also of all vertebrates without exception, also have gill slits, a two-chambered heart, and other signs characteristic of fish at the early stages of development. For example, an avian embryo in the first days of incubation is also a tailed fish-like creature with gill slits. At this stage, the future chick reveals similarities with lower fish, and with amphibian larvae, and with the early stages of development of other vertebrates (including humans). In subsequent stages of development, the embryo of a bird becomes similar to reptiles:

And while in a chicken embryo, by the end of the first week, both the hind and front limbs have the appearance of identical legs, while the tail has not yet disappeared, and feathers have not yet formed from the papillae, by all its characteristics it stands closer to reptiles than to adult birds.

The human embryo passes through similar stages during embryogenesis. Then, over a period of approximately between the fourth and sixth weeks of development, it transforms from a fish-like organism into an organism indistinguishable from a monkey embryo, and only then acquires human features.

Haeckel called this repetition of the traits of ancestors in the course of the individual development of an individual recapitulation.

There are many other examples of recapitulations that confirm the fulfillment of the "biogenetic law" in some cases. So, when the land hermit crab of the palm thief reproduces, its females, before hatching, enter the sea, and there planktonic shrimp-like zoea larvae emerge from the eggs, having a completely symmetrical abdomen. Then they turn into glaucotoe and sink to the bottom, where they find suitable shells of gastropods. For some time they lead a lifestyle characteristic of most hermit crabs, and at this stage they have a soft spiral abdomen with asymmetric limbs, which is characteristic of this group, and breathe with gills. Palm thieves that have grown to a certain size leave the shell, go out onto land, acquire a rigid, shortened abdomen, similar to the abdomen of crabs, and permanently lose the ability to breathe in water.

Such a complete fulfillment of the biogenetic law is possible in those cases when the evolution of ontogenesis occurs by lengthening it - "adding stages":

(In this diagram, species-ancestors and species-descendants are located from top to bottom, and from left to right - the stages of their ontogenesis.)

Facts contradicting biogenetic law

Already in the 19th century, enough facts were known that contradicted the biogenetic law. Thus, numerous examples of neoteny were known, in which, in the course of evolution, there is a shortening of ontogenesis and the loss of its final stages. In the case of neoteny, the adult stage of the offspring species resembles the larval stage of the ancestor species, and not vice versa, as would be expected with full recapitulation.

It was also well known that, contrary to the "law of embryonic similarity" and "biogenetic law", the structure of the earliest stages of development of the embryos of vertebrates - blastula and gastrula - differs very sharply, and only at later stages of development is a "knot of similarity" observed - the stage, on which the structural plan typical for vertebrates is laid, and the embryos of all classes are really similar to each other. Differences in the early stages are associated with a different amount of yolk in the oocytes: with an increase in yolk, cleavage becomes at first uneven, and then (in fish, birds and reptiles) incomplete superficial. As a result, the structure of the blastula also changes - celloblastula is present in species with a small amount of yolk, amphiblastula - with a medium amount, and discoblastula - with a large amount. In addition, the course of development in the early stages changes sharply in terrestrial vertebrates in connection with the appearance of embryonic membranes.

The relationship of biogenetic law with Darwinism

The biogenetic law is often seen as confirmation of Darwinian evolutionary theory, although it does not follow from classical evolutionary doctrine at all.

For example, if the view A3 arose by evolution from an older species A1 through a series of transitional forms (A1 => A2 => A3), then, in accordance with the biogenetic law (in its modified version), the reverse process is also possible, in which the species A3 turns into A2 by shortening the development and the loss of its final stages (neoteny or pedogenesis).

Darwinism and the synthetic theory of evolution, on the contrary, deny the possibility of a complete return to ancestral forms (Dollo's law of irreversibility of evolution). The reason for this, in particular, is the rearrangement of embryonic development at its early stages (arhallaxis according to A. N. Severtsov), in which the genetic programs of development change so significantly that their complete recovery in the course of further evolution becomes almost impossible.

Scientific criticism of biogenetic law and further development of the doctrine of the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny

The accumulation of facts and theoretical developments have shown that the biogenetic law in the formulation of Haeckel is never fulfilled in its pure form. Recapitulation can only be partial.

These facts forced many embryologists to completely reject the biogenetic law in Haeckel's formulations. Thus, S. Gilbert writes: “This point of view ( on the repetition of ontogeny phylogeny) was scientifically discredited even before it was proposed ... So it spread to biology and the social sciences ... before it was shown to be based on false assumptions. "

R. Raff and T. Kofman are just as harsh: "The rediscovery and development of Mendelian genetics at the turn of two centuries will show that, in essence, the biogenetic law is just an illusion" (p. 30), "The last blow to the biogenetic law was dealt then when it became clear that ... morphological adaptations are important ... for all stages of ontogenesis ”(p.31).

In a sense, causes and effects are confused in the biogenetic law. Phylogenesis is a sequence of ontogenesis, therefore, changes in adult forms during phylogenesis can only be based on changes in ontogenesis. This understanding of the relationship between ontogeny and phylogenesis came, in particular, to A.N.Severtsov, who in 1912-1939 developed the theory of phylembryogenesis. According to Severtsov, all embryonic and larval characters are divided into cenogenesis and phylembryogenesis. Severtsov interpreted the term "cenogenesis" proposed by Haeckel differently; for Haeckel, cenogenesis (any new traits that distorted recapitulation) was the opposite of palingenesis (preservation in development of unchanged traits that were present in the ancestors). Severtsov used the term “cenogenesis” to designate characters that serve as adaptations to the embryonic or larval lifestyle and do not occur in adult forms, since they cannot have an adaptive meaning for them. Severtsov attributed to cenogenesis, for example, the embryonic membranes of the amniotes (amnion, chorion, allantois), the placenta of mammals, the egg tooth of the embryos of birds and reptiles, etc.

Phylembryogenesis is such changes in ontogenesis that, in the course of evolution, lead to a change in the characteristics of adults. Severtsov divided phylembryogenesis into anabolic, deviation, and arhallaxis. Anabolism is an extension of ontogeny, accompanied by an extension of stages. Only with this method of evolution is recapitulation observed - the signs of embryos or larvae of offspring resemble those of adult ancestors. With deviation, changes occur at the middle stages of development, which lead to sharper changes in the structure of the adult body than with anabolism. With this method of ontogenetic evolution, only the early stages of descendants can recapitulate the traits of ancestral forms. In arhallaxis, changes occur at the earliest stages of ontogenesis, changes in the structure of an adult organism are most often significant, and recapitulation is impossible.

Biogenetic law of Müller and Haeckel. Ontogeny of plants and animals.

Hurry up to take advantage of discounts of up to 50% on "Infourok" courses

Topic: Biogenetic Law of Müller and Haeckel. Plant ontogeny. Ontogeny of animals.

Target: To formulate knowledge about the essence and manifestation of biogenetic law, to continue deepening knowledge about the material unity of living nature. Develop the ability to work with the text of the textbook, compare, generalize and draw appropriate conclusions. To form general educational logical UUD - the ability to analyze, synthesize, draw certain conclusions. To foster a culture of educational work and communication.

From the standpoint of the competence approach: to form general educational, informational and communicative competence.

Updating knowledge on the topic "Ontogenesis"

What does the concept of ontogenesis mean? (Individual development of an organism, from the moment of fertilization to death)

- Each organism belongs to a certain species, class, type, which have undergone a certain development.

- What is the name of the historical development of a species or any other taxonomic unit? (phylogenesis)

Our task today in the lesson is to establish the connection between ontogeny and phylogeny.

Let's repeat and recall the material studied during the intellectual warm-up. Exercise 1. - Establish the correct sequence of stages of the embryonic period. (blastula, gastrula, neurula, zygote)

Exercise 2. What are the types of the postembryonic period, the name of the stages. (stages of development of the beetle and grasshopper)

Exercise 3. Set the correct term and definition

1. Amnion - the germ layer, filled with liquid, is an aqueous medium, protects against drying out and damage.

2. Chorion - outer shell. Serves for the exchange of the embryo with the environment, participates in respiration, nutrition

3.Allantois - the shell of the embryo, in which metabolic products accumulate

4. Placenta-allantois together with the chorion forms the placenta, only in mammals. What concepts caused you difficulties.

3. Learning new material.

What does the name R. Hooke tell you? K. Baer? M. Schleiden and T. Schwann? (The names of these scientists are associated with the study of the cell) Think how Schleiden and Schwann were able to create a cell theory? (They collected all available information about the cell, rechecked it and formulated their cell theory)

Guys, it is very important to be able to analyze, generalize information and come to a certain conclusion. Today we will find ourselves in mid XIX century together with the German scientists E. Haeckel and F. Müller and on the basis of generalization known facts we will try to establish a certain pattern. (Ontogeny of moss, development of moss from a spore)

Are mosses the first plants on Earth or do they have ancestors? Prove that algae were the ancestors of mosses (At the beginning of development, moss looks like a green filamentous algae and is called - protonema) Write it down in a notebook. In the ontogeny of moss, there are signs of their ancestors.

2. Study the developmental diagram of the butterfly. What type are butterflies? (Type Arthropods) Can you tell who was the ancestor of the arthropods? (The ancestors of butterflies may have been worms) Why did you decide that annelids were the ancestors? (The larva of a caterpillar butterfly is very similar to a worm) Write it down in a notebook. Butterflies in their development, at the larval stage, repeat the signs of worms.

3. Development of the frog. Tell us about how the frog develops.

(The frog tadpole looks more like a fish. It lives in water, breathes with gills, it has a 2-chambered heart and one circle of blood circulation, there is a lateral line. All these signs are characteristic of fish).

As evidenced by the fact that the tadpole is very similar to a fish. (The ancestors of amphibians were fish)

Can all these facts be called a coincidence? What are the frequently encountered facts called? (By regularity)

Guys, what pattern have you discovered now? ( organisms in their development repeat the signs of their ancestors ) Students write down - biogenetic law .(Each organism in its development repeats the development of its species ) Who opened it and how it is read. You and I have now repeated what Mueller and Haeckel did in 1864, and revealed a pattern.

Who discovered the law of embryonic similarity? (in 1828 K. Baer)

What can you say? (the embryos of different vertebrates in the early stages are very similar)

What does this indicate? (On the unity of the origin of living organisms)

Work with the textbook is organized. In the textbook, find what stages of development the embryos of different organisms go through (the stage of the zygote corresponds to a unicellular organism, a chord appears, gill slits),

Find the answer, why in the early stages the embryos are very similar, and at the later stages they start to differ? (All stages of development are subject to variability. But the structures that appear in early embryos play a very important role. If they change, the embryo dies. And changes in the later stages of development can be beneficial for the organism).

Our Russian scientists biologists A.N.Severtsev and I.I.Shmalgauzen made a great contribution to deepening and clarifying the biogenetic law. Find in the textbook information on what clarifications were made to the content of the law by Russian scientists. (Severtsev A.N. found that in individual development, animals repeat the traits not of adult ancestors, but of their embryos)

Guys, what pattern did we discover in the lesson? Ontogeny is a brief repetition of phylogeny. But in ontogeny not all stages are repeated.

Stress alignment: BIOGENETIC LAW

BIOGENETIC LAW (from the Greek βιος - life and γενεσις - origin), the main biogenetic law, - regularity living nature, which consists in the fact that organisms during their embryonic (intrauterine) development repeat the main stages of development of their kind, that is, their ancestral forms. As a result, in the early stages of development, the embryos of various animals are largely similar in shape. An example of repetition is the developmental sequence of a mammalian embryo. At the first stage, it resembles primary unicellular creatures, in the process of further development it acquires a resemblance to a worm-like creature, then to a fish-like creature, etc. Such parallelism confirms that the process of development of living nature went from lower forms to higher ones, from simple to complex ones. Repetition is also observed in the development of individual organs. So, for example, in the process of development of the embryo of a modern horse, its limbs undergo changes similar to those observed in the evolution of a number of equines.

Formulated by B. z. German zoologist E. Haeckel (1866). However, even before him, Charles Darwin drew attention to the fact that the embryo is often, as it were, a darkened image of ancestral forms and that the similarity in the development of animal embryos is associated with the commonality of their origin. B.'s value z. F. Engels emphasized for the theory of development. B. z. at one time served as a means of promoting the theory of organic development. peace and a weapon of struggle against anti-Darwinists, who denied the variability of species and the continuity between them. However B. z. reveals only one of the sides of the links between phylogeny (development of the genus) and ontogeny (individual development) - the influence of phylogenesis on ontogenesis, while they must be considered in their indissoluble unity and interdependence.

In the beginning. 20th century A number of bourgeois psychologists and educators (American psychologists S. Hall, J. Baldwin, and others) made an illegal attempt to transfer B. z. from natural science to psychology and pedagogy. According to the views of B.'s supporters z. in psychology and pedagogy, there is supposedly an analogy between the development of a child and the development of mankind. So, for example, early age children were compared by some authors with the period of initial gathering and digging up roots, age 5 - 12 years - with the period of hunting, older age - with the period of industrial production. According to another classification, up to school age(3 - 7 years) supposedly corresponds to the era of myths, primary school age (7 - 10 years) - antiquity, middle school age (11 - 14 years) - the era of Christianity. Even youth was viewed from this point of view as "the discoverer of the past races" (Hall).

Similar interpretations, which completely distorted the true natural-scientific meaning of biology, were also given to individual features of the psyche of children at different stages of their development. So, the initial forms of a child's fear of strangers for him, people supposedly reproduce the features of animal instinctive fear, and the positive attitude that arises, as if only in the future, supposedly resurrects the “stage of feelings of the ancient patriarchs” (Baldwin).

Also groundless is the desire of bourgeois authors to seek from the point of view of bourgeois z. similarities in children's drawings and images of ancient peoples. On this basis, attempts were made to create even a special "theory" of drawing performed for children, which instilled an extreme formalistic approach among children’s illustrators. primitive.

An attempt to mechanically transfer B. z. in psychology and pedagogy is one of the expressions of idealistic. and a reactionary view of the development of the psyche as a process, supposedly fatalistically and one-sidedly determined by some kind of “ripening” of properties and abilities inherited from the child; at the same time, the determining influence of the social environment on the development of the psyche is completely ignored. PEDs are also harmful and unscientific. conclusions, to-rye follow from attempts to transfer B. z. into the theory of the development of the child's psyche: if the psyche. development is determined entirely by the history of the development of mankind, the main stages of a cut it must repeat in a fatal way, then upbringing and training are forced only to dutifully follow the change of these stages and adapt to them; they seem to be unable to play any active role.

B. z. was widely used by pedology to substantiate its main position - Fata Listich. the conditionality of the fate of children by the influence of heredity and the unchanging environment. Sov. psychology and pedagogy resolutely reject attempts to endure B. z. in the theory of development of the psyche. the life of the child, his upbringing and education. The fact that in the process is mental. development of the child, as well as in the process of historical. development of the psyche, there is a transition from a less developed to a more developed psyche, can by no means serve as a basis for the assertion that the development of the human psyche in ontogenesis is fatally predetermined by the development of the psyche in phylogenesis.

Sov. Psychology recognizes that the problem of the relationship between the properties of the species and the individual remains at the human stage, but it acquires a completely different content. A person implements in the process of ontogenetic. development of achievements of their own kind, including those accumulated over the course of socio-historical. development. However, the form of inheritance of achievements is socio-historical. development of mankind is fundamentally different from biological. forms of inheritance of phylogenetically developed properties. Accordingly, the form of transferring the achievements of historical development of humanity to an individual. Psychic. the properties of a person are not the identification of certain biologically inherent special properties in him, but are formed in the process of mastering the social and historical experience of mankind, embodied in language, science and technology, in the creations of art and moral norms.

A truly scientific understanding of the development of the psyche of children, without denying the role of heredity (see Heredity and upbringing) and innate characteristics of the organism, reveals the originality of the development of the psyche of each child, which is closely dependent on those specific socio-historical. conditions in which it is carried out, as well as that main, leading role, which belongs to the development of the psyche of children, their upbringing and training.

Lit .: Engels F., Anti-Dühring, M., 1957, p. 70; Darwin Ch., The origin of species by natural selection, Soch., Vol. 3, M.-L., 1939; Muller F., Haeckel E., Basic biogenetic law, M.-L., 1940; A.F. Chamberlain, Child. Essays on Human Evolution, trans. from English, h. 1 - 2, M., 1911; Leontiev A.N., On the historical approach to the study of the human psyche, in the book: Psychological science in the USSR, t. 1, M., 1959; Hall G. S., Adolescence, its psychology. v. 1 - 2, N. Y., 1904 - 08.

A. N. Leontiev. Moscow.

Pedagogical encyclopedia. Volume 1. Ch. ed. - A.I. Kairov and F.N. Petrov. M., 'Soviet Encyclopedia', 1964.832 columns. with ill., 7 y. ill.
Lithuania: self-registration of a visa for Russians in 2018 Holidays in the Baltic countries are quite a popular destination for tourism in Russia. But due to the fact that not so long ago they joined the EU and signed the Schengen agreement, they need Schengen to visit them. For Russians visa to Lithuania [...]
Payments of maternity capital will be extended for another 5 years.The program for the provision of maternity capital wants to be extended for another 5 years. The Ministry of Labor has submitted a new bill to the State Duma, according to which the opportunity to receive maternity capital will be extended until 2023. Such a statement was made [...]
Pension for police officers in 2018 Police officers are equated to the military and interaction with them is regulated by the relevant laws. What is the pension of the police, the features of calculating the length of service and the nuances of registration - this is what our article is about. In 2018 (starting from January) it is planned to [...]
Lecture 7: "The scope and powers of local self-government" 7.6. Powers of local self-government bodies in the field of environmental protection, ecology, nature management, land use and subsoil use In the considered spheres of management, local self-government bodies [...]
Yaroslavl registry office to apply Documents for filing an application to the registry office (Yaroslavl) Here is a list of documents that must be collected to apply to the registry office: passports of persons intending to get married What is important to note here: the old-style passport is valid in the registry office [...]

Ontogenesis- the individual development of the body, a set of sequential morphological, physiological and biochemical transformations that the body undergoes from fertilization (with sexual reproduction) or from the moment of separation from the mother (during asexual reproduction) to the end of life.

Development life cycle as a reflection of evolution.

The life cycle is the result of a genetic program developed during a long process of evolutionary development.

Fertilization (zygote is a unicellular organism).

Embryonic development (blastula - colonial protozoa, gastrula - simplest multicellular, fetus - full-fledged multicellular).

Birth (vertebrates).

Postembryonic development (mammals).

Aging.

2. The theory of the origin of multicellular E. Haeckel and I. I. Mechnikov

E. Haeckel's theory (1884):

In constructing his hypothesis, he proceeded from embryological studies carried out by that time by A.O. Kovalevsky and other zoologists, mainly on the lancelet and a number of vertebrates. Relying on the biogenetic law, Haeckel believed that each stage of ontogeny repeats some stage passed by the ancestors of this species during phylogenetic development. According to him, the zygote stage corresponds to unicellular ancestors, the blastula stage - spherical - flagellate colony. Further, according to this hypothesis, one of the sides of the spherical colony protruded and a two-layer organism was formed, which Haeckel called gastrea, and Haeckel's hypothesis was called the theory of gastrea. This theory played an important role in the history of science, as it contributed to the approval of monophilic ideas about the origin of multicellular organisms.

The theory of I.I. Mechnikov (1886):

According to him, in a hypothetical ancestor of multicellular organisms - a spherical colony of flagellates - cells that captured food particles temporarily lost flagella and moved inside the colony. Then they could return to the surface again and restore the flagellum. Gradually, in the spherical colony, a division of function between the colony members took place. For the successful capture of food, active movement is necessary, which led to the polarization of the body. The anterior cells acquired specialization in relation to movement, and the posterior cells in relation to nutrition... The resulting difficulty in the transfer of food from the back cells to the front led to immigration phagocytoblasts into the body cavity. This hypothetical organism is similar to the larva of many sponges and

coelenterates. Initially, Mechnikov called it perenchimella. Then, due to the fact that the inner layer of a hypothetical organism is formed from phagocytoblasts, he called it phagocytella. This theory is called the theory of phagocytella.

3. Biogenetic law of Haeckel-Muller and its application in the construction of the concept of the origin of multicellular

Biogenetic law (E. Haeckel and F. Müller): each individual at the early stages of ontogenesis repeats some of the basic structural features of its ancestors, in other words, ontogeny (individual development) is a brief repetition of phylogenesis (evolutionary development

Independently of each other, Haeckel and Müller formulated the biogenetic law.

ONTOGENESIS THERE IS A SHORT REPEAT OF PHILOGENESIS.

In ontogeny, Haeckel distinguished between palingenesis and cenogenesis. Palingenesis - signs of the embryo, repeating the signs of ancestors (chord, cartilaginous primary skull, branchial arches, primary kidneys, primary unicameral heart). But their formation can shift in time - heterochrony, and in space - heterotopy. Cenogenesis are adaptive formations in the embryo that are not preserved in the adult state. He pointed out that cenogenesis affects palingenesis and distorts them. He believed that, due to cenogenesis, recapitulation does not occur completely. He started from this theory when he created the theory of gastrea.

Further research showed that the biogenetic law is valid only in general terms. There is not a single stage of development at which the embryo would repeat the structure of its ancestors. It has also been established that the structure of embryos, rather than the adult stages of the ancestors, is repeated in ontogenesis.

The observation of the ontogenesis of organisms by two independent biologists made it possible to form the Haeckel-Muller biogenetic law. The wording was first voiced in 1866. However, the prerequisites for the formation of the law were identified as early as the 1820s.