Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T05:36:35.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Morphological complexity increase in metazoans

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2016

James W. Valentine ,
Allen G. Collins  and
C. Porter Meyer
James W. Valentine
Affiliation:
Museum of Paleontology and Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
Allen G. Collins
Affiliation:
Museum of Paleontology and Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
C. Porter Meyer
Affiliation:
Museum of Paleontology and Department of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The number of cell types required for the construction of a metazoan body plan can serve as an index of morphological (or anatomical) complexity; living metazoans range from four (placozoans) to over 200 (hominids) somatic cell types. A plot of the times of origin of body plans against their cell type numbers suggests that the upper bound of complexity has increased more or less steadily from the earliest metazoans until today, at an average rate of about one cell type per 3 m.y. (when nerve cell types are lumped). Computer models in which increase or decrease in cell type number was random were used to investigate the behavior of the upper bound of cell type number in evolving clades. The models are Markovian; variance in cell type number increases linearly through time. Scaled to the fossil record of the upper bound of cell type numbers, the models suggest that early rates of increase in maximum complexity were relatively high. The models and the data are mutually consistent and suggest that the Metazoa originated near 600 Ma, that the metazoan “explosion” near the Precambrian/Cambrian transition was not associated with any important increase in complexity of body plans, and that important decreases in the upper bound of complexity are unlikely to have occurred.

Type
Articles
Information
Paleobiology , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , Spring 1994 , pp. 131 - 142
Copyright
Copyright © The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Alberts, B., Bray, D., Lewis, J., Raff, M., Roberts, K., and Watson, J. D. 1989. Molecular biology of the cell, 2d ed. Garland, New York.Google Scholar
Apter, M. J., and Wolpert, L. 1965. Cybernetics and development. I. Information theory. Journal of Theoretical Biology 8:244–257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Berg, H. C. 1983. Random walks in biology. Princeton University Press, N.J.Google Scholar
Bonner, J. T. 1965. Size and cycle. Princeton University Press, N.J.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonner, J. T. 1988. The evolution of complexity. Princeton University Press, N.J.Google Scholar
Carrol, R. L. 1988. Vertebrate paleontology and evolution. Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
Chapman, D. M. 1974. Cnidarian histology. Pp. 2–92in Muscatine, L. and Lenhoff, H. M., eds. Coelenterate biology, reviews and new perspectives. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Conway Morris, S. 1989. South-eastern Newfoundland and adjacent areas (Avalon Zone). Pp. 7–39in Cowie, J. W. and Brasier, M. D., eds. The Precambrian–Cambrian boundary. Clarendon, Oxford.Google Scholar
Crimes, T. P. 1992. The record of trace fossils across the Proterozoic-Cambrian boundary. Pp. 177–202in Lipps, J. H. and Signor, P. W., eds. Origin and early evolution of the Metazoa. Plenum, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, E. 1990. How embryos work: a comparative view of diverse modes of cell fate specification. Development 108:365–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Droser, M. L. 1991. Ichnofabric of the Paleozoic Skolithos ichnofacies and the nature and distribution of Skolithos piperock. Palaios 6:316–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durham, J. W. 1970. The fossil record and the origin of the Deuterostomia. Proceedings of the North American Paleontological Convention 1969 H:1104–1132.Google Scholar
Fedonkin, M. A., and Runnegar, B. N. 1992. Proterozoic metazoan trace fossils. Pp. 389–395in Schopf, J. W. and Klein, C., eds. The Proterozoic biosphere. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, D. C. 1986. Progress in organismal design. Pp. 99–117in Raup, D. M. and Jablonski, D., eds. Patterns and processes in the history of life. Springer, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foote, M. 1992. Rarefaction analysis of morphological and taxonomic diversity. Paleobiology 18:1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1985. The paradox of the first tier: an agenda for paleobiology. Paleobiology 11:2–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1988. Trends as change in variance: a new slant on progress and directionality in evolution. Journal of Paleontology 62:319–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, B. K. 1992. Evolutionary developmental biology. Chapman, London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardisty, M. W., and Potter, I. C., eds. 1971. The biology of lampreys, Vol. 1. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Hardisty, M. W., and Potter, I. C. 1972. The biology of lampreys, Vol. 2. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Hardisty, M. W., and Potter, I. C. 1981. The biology of lampreys, Vol. 3. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Hardisty, M. W., and Potter, I. C. 1982a. The biology of lampreys, Vol. 4a. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Hardisty, M. W., and Potter, I. C. 1982b. The biology of lampreys, Vol. 4b. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Harrison, F. W., and Bogitsh, B. J., eds. 1991. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates, Vol. 3, Platyhelminthes and Nemertinea. Wiley-Liss, New York.Google Scholar
Harrison, F. W., and Bogitsh, B. J., eds. 1991. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates, Vol. 3, Platyheminthes and Nemertinea. Wiley-Liss, New York.Google Scholar
Harrison, F. W., and Ruppert, E. E., eds. 1991. Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates, Vol. 4, Aschelminthes. Wiley-Liss, New York.Google Scholar
Hinegardner, R., and Engleberg, J. 1983. Biological complexity. Journal of Theoretical Biology 104:7–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kauffman, S. A. 1971. Gene regulation networks: a theory for their global structure and behaviors. Pp. 145–182in Moscona, A. A. and Monray, A., eds. Current topics in developmental biology, Vol. 6. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Kauffman, S. A. 1991. Antichaos and adaptation. Scientific American 265:78–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kauffman, S. A. 1993. The origins of order: self-organization and selection in evolution. Oxford University Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maynard Smith, J. 1970. Time in the evolutionary process. Studium Generale 23:266–272.Google Scholar
McKinney, M. L. 1990. Classifying and analysing evolutionary trends. Pp. 28–58in McNamara, K. J., ed. Evolutionary trends. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
McShea, D. W. 1991. Complexity and evolution: what everybody knows. Biological Philosophy 6:303–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McShea, D. W. 1992. A metric for the study of evolutionary trends in the complexity of serial structures. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 45:39–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raff, R. A., and Kaufman, T. C. 1983. Embryos, genes, and evolution. Macmillan, New York.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1975. Taxonomic diversity estimation using rarefaction. Paleobiology 1:333–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1977. Stochastic models in evolutionary paleontology. Pp. 59–78in Hallam, A., ed. Patterns of evolution. Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Raup, D. M. 1981. Extinction: bad genes or bad luck? Acta Geologica Hispanica 16:25–33.Google Scholar
Riedl, R. 1977. A systems-analytical approach to macro-evolutionary phenomena. Quarterly Review of Biology 52:351–370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Runnegar, B. 1982. A molecular-clock date for the origin of the animal phyla. Lethaia 15:199–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, P. T., and Ho, M.-W. 1976. On the increase in complexity in evolution. Journal of Theoretical Biology 63:375–384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1992. A compendium of fossil marine animal families, 2d. ed.Milwaukee Public Museum Contributions in Biology and Geology 83.Google ScholarPubMed
Simpson, T. L. 1984. The cell biology of sponges. Springer, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sneath, P. H. A. 1964. Comparative biochemical genetics in bacterial taxonomy. Pp. 565–583in Leone, C. A., ed. Taxonomic biochemistry and serology. Ronald, New York.Google Scholar
Sogin, M. L.In press. The origin of eukaryotes and evolution into major kingdoms. In Bengtson, S., ed. Early life on earth. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Stanley, S. M. 1973. An explanation for Cope's Rule. Evolution 27:1–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stebbins, G. L. 1969. The basis of progressive evolution. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill.Google Scholar
Valentine, J. W. 1991. Major factors in the rapidity and extent of the metazoan radiation during the Proterozoic-Phanerozoic transition. Pp. 11–13in Simonetta, A. M. and Conway Morris, S., eds. The early evolution of metazoa and the significance of problematic taxa. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Valentine, J. W.In press. The Cambrian explosion. In Bengtson, S., ed. Early life on earth. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Valentine, J. W., Tiffney, B. H., and Sepkoski, J. J. Jr. 1991. Evolutionary dynamics of plants and animals: a comparative approach. Palaios 6:81–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Westheide, W., and Hermans, C. O., eds. 1988. The ultrastructure of polychaeta. Microfauna Marina 4:1–494.Google Scholar
Wicken, J. S. 1979. The generation of complexity in evolution: a thermodynamic and information-theoretical discussion. Journal of Theoretical Biology 77:349–365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed