Skip Navigation


Integrative and Comparative Biology Advance Access originally published online on July 26, 2007
Integrative and Comparative Biology 2007 47(3):390-400; doi:10.1093/icb/icm075
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
47/3/390    most recent
icm075v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Salazar-Ciudad, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology. All rights reserved. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

On the origins of morphological variation, canalization, robustness, and evolvability

Isaac Salazar-Ciudad1
Developmental Biology Program, Institute of Biotechnology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, FIN-00014, Finland

Correspondence: 1E-mail: isaac.salazar{at}helsinki.fi

Canalization is a concept, introduced by Waddington that describes the reduced sensitivity of a phenotype to genetic and environmental perturbations. Some research in canalization assumes that lack of variation in a trait in one genotype with respect to another genotype in a population, is due to the existence of buffering mechanisms against environmental and/or genetic variation. This article criticizes this assumption and out points out other possible problems with the concepts of canalization, robustness, and evolvability. These involve: the neglect of alternative explanations for the lack of variation in a trait, the incompatibility with current understanding of development, the way the mutivariate nature of morphological variation is considered. In addition, this article tries to explain that these concepts implicitly assume, although not generally acknowledged, that without buffering any genetic or environmental variation should give rise to a distinct phenotypic outcome. This can be avoided by restricting the use of canalization to cases in which, as in hsp90, there is direct evidence of buffering. For the other cases it would be clearer to talk about variational properties or simply type of variation. The concept of evolvability is also biased towards univariate comparisons and is dependent on selective pressures. It is suggested that this can be replaced by "type of phenotypic variation" from a genotype or variational properties. Overall, this article proposes that the concepts of canalization and evolvability involve some assumptions that, in most situations, unnecessarily complicate the study of evolution and development.


From the symposium "Linking Genes and Morphology in Vertebrates" presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology, January 3–7, 2007, at Phoenix, Arizona.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.