Examples proving the law of Muller and Haeckel. Onto-phylogenesis relation

The Haeckel-Muller biogenetic law describes the ratio observed in wildlife - ontogenesis, that is, the personal development of each living organism, to a certain extent it repeats phylogenesis - the historical development of the entire group of individuals to which it belongs. The law was formulated, as the name implies, by F. Müller in the 60s of the 19th century independently of each other, and now it is almost impossible to establish the discoverer of the theory.

Obviously, the biogenetic law was not formulated immediately. 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 germline similarity. Its essence lies in the fact that the embryos of individuals belonging to one 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 appear only in the course of further ontogenesis. The law of germline similarity largely determined the biogenetic law: since the embryos of various 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 the embryos, and not adults. Thus, the gill slits in fish are similar to the gill slits of fish embryos, but in no way with the formed gills of adult fish.

It is important to note that one of the most significant evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution is considered directly to be the biogenetic law. Its wording in 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 in the 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 scientists have tried to substantiate this theory from different points of view. G. Hall, for example, resorted directly to the Haeckel-Muller law. He said that the development of the child, including psychologically, is set exclusively biological prerequisites and repeats evolutionary development in general. One way or another, to date, the idea is not unambiguously proven. In psychology, there is still no biogenetic law as such.

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

In two years Ernst Haeckel gave a more generalized formulation:

“Ontogeny (E. Haeckel’s term) is a recapitulation of phylogeny (in many translations, “Ontogeny is a quick and short repetition of phylogeny”).

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

Repeated attempts have been made to extend the biogenetic law to the development of the human psyche...

Modern addition:

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

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

The initial stages of development are more conservative and therefore, in many cases, they 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

Law and its meaning
Criticism
What have we learned?

Topic quiz

Law and its meaning

The essence of the law lies in the fact 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 For Darwin in 1864. Müller wrote that the historical development of a species is reflected in the history of individual development.

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

Rice. 1. Haeckel and Müller.

Scientists made their conclusions when studying embryos of different species based on a number of similar features. For example, in the embryos of mammals and fish, gill arches are formed. Embryos of amphibians, reptiles and mammals go through the same stages of development 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, already 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, signs of the genus and species appear. Curiously, despite his observations, Baer never accepted the theory of evolution.

Since the 19th century, the conclusions of Haeckel and Müller have been criticized.
Imperfections of the main biogenetic law were revealed:

the individual does not repeat all the stages of evolution and goes through the stages of historical development in a compressed form;
the similarity is not observed in embryos and adults, but in two different embryos at a certain stage of development (mammalian gills are similar to the gills of fish embryos, not adults);
neoteny - 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 in the stages of blastula and gastrula in vertebrates, similarities are observed at later stages.

It has been established that the Haeckel-Muller law is never completely fulfilled, there are always deviations and exceptions. Some embryologists noted that the biogenetic law is just an illusion with no serious prerequisites.

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

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

Severtsov attributed to cenogenesis:

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

Rice. 3. Egg tooth is an example of cenogenesis.

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

Philembryogenesis is divided into three types:

archallaxis - 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 goes through the stages of phylogenesis during ontogenesis. The law does not work in its "pure" form and has a lot of assumptions. The biologist Severtsov developed a more complete theory of individual development.

Haeckel-Muller biogenetic law

The formulation of the Haeckel-Muller biogenetic law, its connection with Darwinism and contradictory facts. Fertilization and development of the human embryo. Scientific criticism of the biogenetic law and further development of the doctrine of the relationship between ontogenesis and phylogenesis.

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

The Code of Merchant Shipping of Ukraine regulates the relations that arise in the course of merchant shipping.

Merchant shipping in this Code is understood as activities related to the use of ships for the transport of goods, passengers, baggage and mail, fishing and other marine trades, exploration and mining, 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), M Millen_Edwards (1851). Illustrate them with examples

biogenetic law: in the process of individual development (ontogeny), each organism briefly repeats the trait of periods T and phylogeny.
example:nauplius-crustacean-larva
melinegrid crayfish-sack with globular cells

evolution, like any development, is an irreversible phenomenon, if an organ disappears, it will never reappear, even if necessary, another organ will appear, of a different origin, as it will perform the required function.
example: crustacean heat-limb modifications
heat is calculated in the air - in the aquatic environment

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

2. Haeckel-Muller biogenetic law (also known as "Haeckel's law", "Muller-Haeckel's law", "Darwin-Muller-Haeckel's law", "basic biogenetic law"): each living being in its individual development (ontogeny) repeats to a certain extent the forms passed by its ancestors or its species (phylogenesis).

played important role in the history of the development of science, but at present in its original form is not recognized as modern biological science. By modern interpretation According to the biogenetic law proposed by the Russian biologist A.N. Severtsov at the beginning of the 20th century, in ontogenesis there is a repetition of signs not of adult individuals of the ancestors, but of their embryos.
examples:
In the tadpole, as in lower fish and fish fry, the basis of the skeleton is the notochord, which only later becomes overgrown with cartilaginous vertebrae in the trunk part. The skull of the tadpole is cartilaginous, and well-developed cartilaginous arches adjoin it; gill breathing. The circulatory system is also built according to the fish type: the atrium has not yet been divided into the 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 any further, we should have no hesitation in classifying such an animal as a superclass of fish.
And while in the chicken embryo, until the end of the first week, both the hind and forelimbs look like the same legs, while the tail has not yet disappeared, and feathers have not yet formed from the papillae, in all its characteristics it is 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 to an active lifestyle
from water to land
For the annelids type, body segmentation has a multiple, unsteady character, all segments are homogeneous.
In arthropods (derived from annelids), the number of segments:
reduced in most classes
becomes permanent
individual segments of the body, usually combined into groups (head, chest, abdomen, etc.), are specialized in performing certain functions.

The law of irreversibility of evolution by L. Dollo is the law according to which an organism (population, species) cannot return to its previous state, already implemented in the series of its ancestors, even after returning to their habitat.

Dollo's law of irreversibility of evolution.
A. R. Wallace also, independently of Darwin, came to the conclusion that evolution is irreversible. L. Dollo in 1893 formulated the law of the irreversibility of evolution in the following way: "The organism cannot either wholly or even partially return to the state already realized in the series of its ancestors."

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

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

“The organ, reduced in the course of historical development, never again reaches its former level; an organ that has completely disappeared 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 old way of life, then with a new return to the old way of life, these organs never reappear; instead of them, a replacement is created by other bodies.

The law of irreversibility of evolution should not be extended beyond its applicability. Terrestrial vertebrates are descended from fish, and the five-fingered limb is the result of the transformation of the paired fin of the fish. The terrestrial vertebrate can again return to life in the water, and the five-fingered 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 breathing of their ancestors. Some amphibians returned to a permanent life in the water and again acquired gill breathing. Their gills are, however, larval external gills. The internal gills of the fish type have disappeared forever. In tree-climbing primates, the first toe is reduced to a certain extent. In humans, descended from climbing primates, the first finger of the lower (hind) limbs again underwent significant progressive development (in connection with the transition to walking on two legs), but did not return to some initial state, but acquired a completely unique 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 traveled, and it never leads to a complete restoration of the previous states.

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

Haeckel-Muller biogenetic law, its interpretation by Severtsov. Palingeneses and cenogenesis

F. Muller in his work "For Darwin" (1864) formulated the idea that changes in ontogenetic development underlying 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, an extension and complication of ontogeny is observed, associated with the addition of stages and repetition (recapitulation) in the individual development of traits of more distant adult ancestors. Müller's works served as the basis for the formulation by E. Haeckel (1866) basic biogenetic law, according to which ontogeny is a short and quick repetition of phylogeny. That is, an organic individual repeats during the rapid 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. The signs of adult ancestors that are repeated in the embryogenesis of descendants, he called palingenesis. Adaptations to the embryonic or larval stages are called coenogenesis.

However, Haeckel's ideas were very different from Muller's views on the question of the relationship between ontogenesis and phylogenesis 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. Evolutionary new signs arise not during ontogeny, but in an adult organism. An adult organism evolves, and in the process of this evolution, the signs are shifted to earlier stages of ontogeny.

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

The interpretation of the biogenetic law in the understanding of Muller 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 ontogeny not only as the result of phylogenesis, but also as its basis. Ontogeny is not only lengthened by the addition of stages: it is entirely restructured in the process of evolution; it has its own history, naturally connected with the history of the adult organism and partly determining it.

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

B. h. was formulated in 1866 by him. zoologist E. Haeckel (E.N. Haeckel): “The series of forms through which the individual organism passes during its development, starting from the egg and ending with the fully developed state, is a brief, compressed repetition of the long series of forms passed by the animal ancestors of the same organism or generic forms of its species, starting from ancient times, the so-called. organic creation, up to the present time”, i.e. “ontogeny is a quick and short repetition of phylogenesis”.

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

According to Haeckel, phylogeny 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, which plays the role of an abbreviated and distorted record of the evolutionary transformations of adult organisms (see Ontogeny, Phylogeny) . From these positions, Haeckel divided all the signs of a developing organism into two categories: palingenesis (see) - with

signs or stages of individual development that repeat or recapitulate in the ontogenesis of descendants the stages of phylogenesis of adult ancestors, and coenogenesis - any signs that violate recapitulation. Haeckel considered the cause of cenogenesis to be the secondary adaptations of organisms to the conditions in which their ontogenesis proceeds. Therefore, temporary (provisional) devices that 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 (coenogenesis proper), as well as changes in the laying of organs in time (heterochrony) or place (heterotopias) and secondary changes in the path of ontogenesis of this organ. All these transformations disrupt palingenesis and thus make it difficult to use embryological data for the reconstruction of phylogenesis, for which, as A. N. Severtsov (1939) showed, Haeckel formulated the B. z.

At the beginning of the 20th century A number of authors have proved that Muller (F. Muller), who postulated the occurrence of phylogenetic changes as a result of transformations in the processes of ontogenesis, more correctly than Haeckel explained the relationship between individual and historical development, justified at the present time from the standpoint of genetics. Since evolution occurs in a number of generations, only generative mutations that change the hereditary apparatus of gametes or zygotes matter in it. Only these mutations are transmitted to the next generation, in which they change the course of ontogeny, due to which they appear in the phenotype of descendants. 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.

On the basis of 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 evolution of organs is anabolism, or the superimposition of the final stages of development. In this case, to the stage at which the development of the organ in the ancestors ended, a new one is added (lengthening of ontogenesis), and the final stage of the ontogenesis of the ancestors appears to be shifted to the beginning of development:

Anabolisms E, F, G, H lead to further development of the organ and cause recapitulation of ancestral states (e, f, g). Consequently, it is during evolution through anabolism that the palingenetic path of ontogenesis arises, however, in this case, there is not a shift in the stages of ontogenesis, but a further phylogenetic development of the 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 descendant organ begins in the same way as in the ancestors, but then it changes direction, although additional stages do not arise:

Deviations rebuild ontogeny, 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 ontogenesis is traced at ab stages, and in abc1d3E3 ontogeny, at abc1 stages. The third, rarest, mode of progressive evolution is archallaxis, or a change in the primary rudiments of organs:

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

Through phylembryogenesis, the evolutionary reduction of organs also occurs. There are two types of reduction: rudimentation (underdevelopment) and aphasia (without a trace). During rudimentation, an organ that was normally developed and functioned in the ancestors loses its functional significance in the descendants. In this case, according to A. N. Severtsov, the reduction is carried out by means of negative archallaxis: the priming of the descendants is smaller and weaker than that of the ancestors, develops more slowly and does not reach the ancestral definitive stage. As a result, the organ of the descendants is underdeveloped. With aphasia, the reducing organ not only loses its functional significance, but also becomes harmful to the body. The ontogenesis of such an organ, as a rule, begins and for some time proceeds in the same way as in the ancestors, but then negative anabolism occurs - the organ resolves, and the process proceeds in the reverse order of development, up to the disappearance of the bookmark itself.

The theory of phylembryogenesis is close to Muller's ideas. However, A. N. Severtsov singled out the modus of archallaxis, which can be observed only during evolutionary transformations of parts, and not of the whole organism, studied by Muller. Soviet biologists proved that not only organs, but also tissues and cells of multicellular organisms evolve through phylembryogenesis. There is evidence of evolution through phylembryogenesis not only of developed organs, but also of provisional adaptations (coenogenesis). It has also been found that in a number of cases heterochronies play the role of 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 manifest during ontogenesis. However, mutational variability, unlike 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, is a complex of mutations that have passed natural selection and become the genotypic norm. In this case, phylembryogenesis is a secondary transformation that occurs as a result of the preservation and accumulation of mutations that change morphogenesis (see), and thus the development of adult organisms in accordance with environmental changes. Natural selection more often preserves changes that only build ontogenesis, less often - changing intermediate stages, and even more rarely - transforming morphogenesis from its very first stages. This explains the different frequency of occurrence of anabolism, deviations and archallaxis. Consequently, phylembryogenesis, being a mechanism for the formation of phylogenetically new characters, is at the same time the result of a mutational restructuring of individual development.

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

Bibliography: Lebedin S. N. Correlation of onto- and phylogenesis, bibliography of the question, Izv. Scientific in-ta im. Lesgaft, vol. 20, no. 1, p. 103, 1936; Müller F. and Haeckel E. Basic biogenetic law, trans. from German, M.-L., 1940; Severtsov A.N. Morphological patterns of evolution, p. 453, M.-L., 1939; Severtsov A. S. To the question of the evolution of ontogenesis, Zhurn. total biol., t. 31, no. 2, p. 222, 1970; Shmalga u-zen I. I. Problems of Darwinism, p. 318, L., 1969.

xn--90aw5c.xn--c1avg

Biogenetic law [Haeckel-Muller]

Haeckel-Muller biogenetic law 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 valid in relation to plants. For example, seedlings of cultivars of cotton first have complete lamellar leaves, from which two-, three-, four-, five-lobed leaves then develop. In the wild cotton species G. raimondii and G. klotzschianum, the leaves on the stem are a single plate. Consequently, cultivars 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, but only some stages of the historical development of ancestors are repeated, while the rest fall out. This is explained by the fact that the historical development of ancestors lasts millions of years, and individual development - a short time. In addition, it is not the stages of adult forms of ancestors that are repeated in ontogeny, but their embryonic stages of development.

Theory of phylembryogenesis

Naturally, the question arises: if phylogeny influences ontogeny, then can ontogeny influence phylogeny? It should be emphasized that in ontogeny not only certain stages in 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 the embryonic development of an individual. 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 phylogenesis. For example, in reptiles, the epithelial cells of the skin, and under it the connective tissue, develop and form scales. And in mammals, derivatives of epithelial and connective tissue, changing, form a hair bag under the skin.

biogenetic law

biogenetic law Haeckel-Muller (also known as "Haeckel's law", "Muller-Haeckel's law", "Darwin-Muller-Haeckel's law", "basic biogenetic law"): every living being in its individual development (ontogenesis) repeats to a certain extent forms passed by its ancestors or its 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 ontogenesis there is a repetition of the signs not of adult individuals of the ancestors, but of their embryos.

History of creation

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

The German anatomist and embryologist Martin Rathke (1793-1860) in 1825 described gill slits and arches in mammalian and bird embryos - one of the most striking examples of recapitulation [ source unspecified 469 days] .

In 1824-1826, Etienne Serra formulated the “Meckel-Serra law of parallelism”: each organism in its embryonic development repeats the adult forms of more primitive animals [ source unspecified 469 days] .

In 1828, Karl Maksimovich Baer, based on the data of Rathke and on the results of his own studies of the development of vertebrates, formulated the law of germline similarity: “Embryos successively pass in their development from common features type to more and more special features. The last signs that indicate that the embryo belongs to a particular genus, species, develop, and, finally, development ends with the appearance characteristic features this individual." Baer did not attach evolutionary meaning to this "law" (he did not accept it until the end of his life). evolutionary doctrine Darwin), but later this law came to be regarded as "embryological proof 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 On the Origin of Species in 1859: , in its adult or personal state, all members of the same large class ”(Darwin Ch. Soch. M.-L., 1939, vol. 3, p. 636.)

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

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

Examples of the fulfillment of the biogenetic law

A vivid 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 basis of the skeleton is the notochord, which only later becomes overgrown with cartilaginous vertebrae in the trunk part. The skull of the tadpole is cartilaginous, and well-developed cartilaginous arches adjoin it; gill breathing. The circulatory system is also built according to the fish type: the atrium has not yet been divided into the 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 any further, we should have no hesitation in classifying such an animal as a superclass of fish.

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

And while in the chicken embryo, until the end of the first week, both the hind and forelimbs look like the same legs, while the tail has not yet disappeared, and feathers have not yet formed from the papillae, in all its characteristics it is closer to reptiles than to adult birds.

The human embryo goes through similar stages during embryogenesis. Then, between approximately the fourth and sixth weeks of development, it transforms from a fish-like organism to an organism indistinguishable from an ape fetus, and only then acquires human features.

Haeckel called this repetition of ancestral traits during 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, during the reproduction of the terrestrial hermit crab of the palm thief, its females enter the sea before hatching the larvae, and there planktonic shrimp-like zoea larvae emerge from the eggs, having a completely symmetrical abdomen. Then they turn into glaucotoe and settle to the bottom, where they find suitable gastropod shells. For some time they lead a lifestyle characteristic of most hermit crabs, and at this stage they have a soft spiral abdomen characteristic of this group with asymmetrical limbs and breathe through gills. Having grown to a certain size, palm thieves leave the shell, go to land, acquire a rigid shortened abdomen, similar to the abdomen of crabs, and forever lose the ability to breathe in water.

Such a complete fulfillment of the biogenetic law is possible in those cases when the evolution of ontogeny occurs by its lengthening - "extension of stages":

(In this diagram, from top to bottom, ancestor and descendant species are located, and from left to right, the stages of their ontogeny.)

Facts contrary to the 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, ontogenesis shortens and its final stages fall out. In the case of neoteny, the adult stage of the descendant species resembles the larval stage of the ancestor species, and not vice versa, as would be expected with complete recapitulation.

It was also well known that, contrary to the "law of germinal similarity" and the "biogenetic law", the earliest stages of development of vertebrate embryos - blastula and gastrula - differ very sharply in structure, and only at later stages of development is a "knot of similarity" observed - the stage on which the structural plan characteristic of 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 eggs: with its increase, fragmentation becomes first uneven, and then (in fish, birds and reptiles) incomplete superficial. As a result, the structure of the blastula also changes - the coeloblastula 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 dramatically in terrestrial vertebrates due to the appearance of embryonic membranes.

Relationship of biogenetic law with Darwinism

The biogenetic law is often regarded as a confirmation of Darwin's theory of evolution, although it does not follow at all from classical evolutionary teaching.

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 development and 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 restructuring of embryonic development at its early stages (archallaxis according to A.N. Severtsov), in which the genetic programs of development change so significantly that their complete restoration in the course of further evolution becomes almost unbelievable.

Scientific criticism of the biogenetic law and further development of the doctrine of the relationship between ontogenesis and phylogenesis

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

These facts have led many embryologists to completely reject the biogenetic law in Haeckel's formulations. So, S. Gilbert writes: “Such a point of view ( on the repetition of phylogenesis by ontogeny) was scientifically discredited even before it was proposed ... Therefore, it spread into biology and the social sciences ... before it was shown that it was based on false premises.

R. Raff and T. Kofman speak just as sharply: “The secondary discovery 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, cause and effect are mixed up in the biogenetic law. Phylogeny is a sequence of ontogenies, therefore, changes in adult forms in the course of phylogenesis can be based only on changes in ontogeny. This understanding of the relationship between ontogenesis and phylogenesis came, in particular, 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. The term "coenogenesis", proposed by Haeckel, was interpreted differently by Severtsov; for Haeckel, cenogenesis (any new traits that distorted recapitulation) was the opposite of palingenesis (preservation in development of unchanged traits that were also present in ancestors). Severtsov used the term "coenogenesis" to designate traits that serve as adaptations to the embryonic or larval lifestyle and are not found in adult forms, since they cannot have adaptive significance for them. Severtsov referred to coenogenesis, for example, the embryonic membranes of amniotes (amnion, chorion, allantois), the placenta of mammals, the egg tooth of the embryos of birds and reptiles, etc.

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

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

Take advantage of up to 50% discounts on Infourok courses

Topic: Muller and Haeckel's biogenetic law. Plant ontogeny. Animal ontogeny.

Target: To formulate knowledge about the essence and manifestation of the 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. Foster a culture of learning and communication.

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

Updating knowledge on the topic "Ontogeny"

What does the concept of ontogeny mean? (Individual development of the 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 a connection between ontogenesis and phylogeny.

Let's repeat and remember the studied material 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. (developmental stages of the cockchafer and grasshopper)

Exercise 3. Set the right term and definition

1. Amnion - the embryonic membrane, filled with liquid, is an aqueous medium, protects from 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 are causing you trouble?

3. Learning new material.

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

Guys, it is very important to be able to analyze, summarize information and come to a certain conclusion. Today we will be in mid-nineteenth century together with the German scientists E. Haeckel and F. Müller and based on the generalization known facts Let's try to establish a certain pattern. (Moss ontogeny, development of moss from spores)

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

2. Study the pattern of butterfly development. What type are butterflies? (Type Arthropods) Can you tell who was the ancestor of arthropods? (The ancestors of butterflies may have been worms) Why did you decide that the ancestors were annelids? (A caterpillar butterfly larva 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. Frog development. 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 common facts called? (pattern)

Guys, so what pattern have you discovered now? ( organisms in their development repeat the characteristics of their ancestors ) Students write down– biogenetic law .(Each organism in its development repeats the development of its species. ) Who discovered and how to read. We have now repeated what Muller and Haeckel did in 1864, we have identified a pattern.

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

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

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 zygote stage corresponds to unicellular organism, chord appears, gill slits),

Find the answer why in the early stages the embryos are very similar, and in the later stages they begin to differ? (All stages of development are subject to variability .. But the structures that arise 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 body).

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

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

Emphasis: BIOGENETIC LAW

BIOGENETIC LAW (from the Greek βιος - life and γενεσις - origin), the main biogenetic law, regularity living nature, consisting in the fact that organisms during their embryonic (intrauterine) development repeat the main stages of the development of their kind, i.e., 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 ones to complex ones. Repeatability 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 horses.

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 a kind of obscured image of ancestral forms and that the similarity in the development of animal embryos is associated with the commonality of their origin. Value B. z. F. Engels emphasized for the theory of development. B. h. at one time served as a means of promoting the theory of organic development. peace and weapons of struggle against anti-Darwinists, who denied the variability of species and the continuity between them. However B. z. reveals only one of the aspects of the relationship between phylogenesis (genus development) and ontogenesis (individual development) - the influence of phylogenesis on ontogeny, while they must be considered in their inseparable unity and interdependence.

In the beginning. 20th century A number of bourgeois psychologists and educators (Amer. psychologists S. Hall, J. Baldwin, and others) made an illegitimate attempt to transfer B. z. from natural science to psychology and pedagogy. According to the views of supporters of B. z. in psychology and pedagogy, there is supposedly an analogy between the development of the child and the development of humanity. So, for example, early age children was compared by some authors with the period of initial gathering and digging up the roots, the age of 5-12 years - with the hunting period, the older age - with the period of industrial production. According to another classification, school age(3 - 7 years old) allegedly corresponds to the era of myths, primary school age (7 - 10 years old) - antiquity, middle school age (11 - 14 years old) - 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 biological science, 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 allegedly reproduce the features of animal instinctive fear, and the positive attitude towards people that appears, as if only in the future, supposedly resurrects the "stage of feelings of the ancient patriarchs" (Baldwin).

Also unfounded is the striving of bourgeois authors to seek from the point of view of B. z. similar features in children's drawings and images of ancient peoples. On this basis, attempts were made even to create a special "theory" of drawing performed for children, which planted extreme formalism among children's illustrators. primitive.

An attempt to mechanically transfer B. h. in psychology and pedagogy is one of the expressions of the idealistic. and a reactionary view of the development of the psyche as a process, allegedly fatalistically and one-sidedly determined by some kind of "from within" going "maturing" of properties and abilities inherited in the child; this does not take into account the determining influence of the social environment on the development of the psyche. Harmful and anti-scientific are also ped. conclusions, to-rye follow from attempts to transfer B. h. in the theory of development of the child's psyche: if mental. development is determined entirely by the history of the development of mankind, the main stages of which it must fatally repeat, then education and training are forced only to obediently follow the change of these stages and adapt to them; they seem to be unable to play any active role.

B. h. was widely involved in pedology to substantiate its main position - fatalistic. the conditionality of the fate of children by the influence of heredity and the unchanging environment. Owls. psychology and pedagogy resolutely reject attempts to endure B. h. in the theory of mental development. child's life, upbringing and education. The fact that in the process of 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, by no means can 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 phylogeny.

Owls. psychology recognizes that the problem of the relationship between the properties of the species and the individual at the stage of man remains, but it acquires a completely different content. A person realizes in the ontogenetic process. development of the achievement of its kind, including those accumulated over the course of the socio-historical. development. However, the form of inheritance of social and historical achievements. human development is fundamentally different from the biological. forms of inheritance of phylogenetically established properties. Accordingly, the form of transferring historical achievements is also fundamentally different. human development for the individual. Psych. human properties are not the identification of certain biologically inherent special properties in him, but are formed in the process of mastering the socio-historical experience of mankind, embodied in language, science and technology, in works 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 the innate characteristics of the organism, reveals the uniqueness of the development of the psyche of each child, which is closely dependent on those specific socio-historical. the conditions in which it is carried out, as well as the main, leading role, which belongs to the development of the psyche of children, their upbringing and education.

Lit .: Engels F., Anti-Dühring, M., 1957, p. 70; Darwin Ch., Origin of species by means of natural selection, Soch., v. 3, M.-L., 1939; Müller F., Gekkel E., Basic biogenetic law, M.-L., 1940; Chamberlain A.F., Child. Essays on human evolution, trans. from English, part 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, vol. 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. editor - A.I. Kairov and F.N. Petrov. M., 'Soviet Encyclopedia', 1964. 832 column. with illustrations, 7 sheets. ill.
Lithuania: self-issuing a visa for Russians in 2018 Holidays in the Baltic countries are a fairly 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, you need a Schengen to visit them. For Russians, a visa to Lithuania [...]
Maternity capital payments will be extended for another 5 years They want to extend the maternity capital program for another 5 years This statement was made […]
Retirement for police officers in 2018 Police officers are equated with the military and interaction with them is regulated by relevant laws. What is the pension of the police, the features of calculating the length of service and the nuances of registration - this is our article. In 2018 (starting from January) - it is planned to […]
Lecture 7: "Limits of jurisdiction and powers of local government" 7.6. The powers of local governments in the field of environmental protection, ecology, nature management, land use and subsoil use In the areas of management under consideration, local government […]
Yaroslavl registry office submit an application Documents for applying to the registry office (Yaroslavl) Here is a list of documents that you need to collect to apply to the registry office: passports of persons intending to marry What is important to note here: in the registry office, an old-style passport is […]

Ontogenesis- individual development of the organism, a set of successive morphological, physiological and biochemical transformations undergone by the body, from fertilization (with sexual reproduction) or from the moment of separation from the mother (with asexual reproduction) until the end of life.

The life cycle of development as a reflection of evolution.

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

Fertilization (zygote is a single-celled organism).

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

Birth (vertebrates).

Postembryonic development (mammals).

Aging.

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

Theory of E. Haeckel (1884):

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

Theory of I.I. Mechnikov (1886):

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

coelenterates. Initially, Mechnikov called it perenhimella. 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 phagocytella theory.

3. Haeckel-Muller biogenetic law and its application in constructing the concept of the origin of multicellular

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

Haeckel and Müller independently formulated the biogenetic law.

ONTOGENESIS IS A BRIEF REPETITION OF PHYLOGENESIS.

In ontogeny, Haeckel distinguished between palingenesis and cenogenesis. Palingenesis - signs of the embryo, repeating the signs of ancestors (chord, cartilaginous primary skull, gill arches, primary kidneys, primary single-chamber heart). But their formation can shift in time - heterochrony, and in space - heterotopia. Cenogeneses are adaptive formations in the embryo that do not persist in adulthood. He pointed out that cenogenesis influences palingenesis and distorts them. He believed that due to coenogenesis, recapitulation does not occur completely. He started from this theory when he created the theory of gastrea.

Further studies have shown 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 in ontogenesis the structure is repeated not of the adult stages of the ancestors, but of the embryos.

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