Difference between revisions of "Zoology" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
m (Robot: Remove contracted tag)
 
(19 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Contracted}}{{Status}}
+
{{Copyedited}}{{Paid}}{{Approved}}{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}}{{Status}}
Note: This is only a very rough draft, with notes that may be useful in developing the article. Please do not edit this article until the actual article is complete — i.e., when this notice is removed. You may add comments on what you would like to see included. [[User:Rick Swarts|Rick Swarts]] 00:05, 28 Sep 2005 (UTC)
+
[[Category:Public]]
 +
'''Zoology''' is the scientific study of [[animal]]s. A branch of [[biology]], zoology includes the study of structure and [[physiology]] of animals from the molecular level to the whole [[organism]], the development and [[life cycle]] of individual animals, classification, animal behavior, population and distribution studies, and the interactions between animals and their biotic (living) and abiotic (nonliving) environments.
  
 +
The term zoology is most commonly pronounced with the first syllable as "zō," rhyming with "row." Another popular, but less common pronunciation is with the first syllable rhyming with "zoo," as in "two." Zoo is short for "zoological garden". The term comes from the Greek "ζώον" or ''zoon'' meaning "animal" and "λόγος" or ''logos'' which translates as "word," or "speech," with a literal meaning of "that which refers to."
  
'''Zoology''' is the scientific study of [[animal]]s. A branch of [[biology]], zoology includes the study of structure and physiology of animals (from the molecular level to the whole organism), the development and life cycle of individual animals, classification studies, animal behavior, population and distribution studies, and the interactions between animals and their biotic (living) and abiotic (nonliving) environments.
+
[[Human]]s are classified as animals, as species ''Homo sapiens''; however, humans are unique, and define themselves in not just biological or zoological terms, but also in psychological, moral, spiritual, and social terms. Thus, the study of humans goes well beyond the discipline of zoology.
 
 
The term zoology is most commonly pronounced with the first syllable as "zō," rhyming with "row." Another popular, but less common pronunciation is with the first syllable rhyming with "zoo," as in "two." (Zoo is short for "zoological garden".) The term comes from the Greek "ζώον" or ''zoon'' ("animal") and "λόγος" or ''logos'' ("word," or "speech," with a literal meaning of "that which refers to." )
 
 
 
Humans are classified as animals, as species ''Homo sapiens''; however, humans are unique, and define themselves in not just biological or zoological terms, but also in psychological, moral, spiritual, and social terms. Thus, the study of humans goes well beyond the discipline of zoology.
 
  
 
== Branches of zoology==
 
== Branches of zoology==
  
As the science that studies one of the major classifications of living and once-living organisms, zoology, like botany (the study of plants), is a very diverse field. The study of animals includes numerous sub-disciplines, including the following:
+
As the science that studies a major group of living and once-living organisms, zoology, like [[botany]], the study of plants, is a very diverse field. The study of animals includes numerous sub-disciplines, including the following:
  
 
#The structure and physiology of animals is studied under such fields as [[anatomy]], [[embryology]], pathology, animal nutriology, and [[physiology]];
 
#The structure and physiology of animals is studied under such fields as [[anatomy]], [[embryology]], pathology, animal nutriology, and [[physiology]];
#The common [[genetics|genetic]] and developmental mechanisms of animals (and plants) is studied in molecular biology, molecular genetics, cellular biology, [[biochemistry]], and developmental biology;  
+
#The common [[genetics|genetic]] and developmental mechanisms of animals (and plants) is studied in [[molecular biology]], [[molecular genetics]], [[cellular biology]], [[biochemistry]], and [[developmental biology]];  
#The [[ecology]] and interactions of animals is covered under behavioral ecology, physiological ecology, insect ecology, biodiversity, conservation, parasitology, marine biology, and other fields, including ecology in general;
+
#The [[ecology]] and interactions of animals is covered under [[behavioral ecology]], [[physiological ecology]], insect ecology, biodiversity, conservation, parasitology, [[marine biology]], and other fields, including [[ecology]] in general;
 
#The evolution and history of animals is considered in evolutionary studies and [[paleontology]];
 
#The evolution and history of animals is considered in evolutionary studies and [[paleontology]];
 
#The distribution of animals is studied in zoogeography;
 
#The distribution of animals is studied in zoogeography;
Line 21: Line 19:
 
#The classification, naming, and describing of animals is part of systematics and [[taxonomy]].
 
#The classification, naming, and describing of animals is part of systematics and [[taxonomy]].
  
In addition, the various taxonomically oriented-disciplines, such as mammalogy, primatology, [[herpetology]], [[ornithology]], [[icthyology]], and so forth, study aspects that are specific to those groups.
+
In addition, the various taxonomically oriented disciplines, such as mammalogy (the study of mammals), primatology (primates), [[herpetology]] (reptiles and amphibians), [[ornithology]] (birds), [[icthyology]] (fish), and so forth, study aspects that are specific to those groups.
  
Zoology is such a diverse discipline that there is not any professional society that covers all branches of zoology in a dominant manner. Rather, one finds societies according to the various taxons, such as birds, mammals, fish, snakes, wildlife, and so forth.
+
Zoology is such a diverse discipline that there is not any professional society that covers all branches of zoology in a dominant manner. Rather, one finds societies according to the various taxons, such as birds, mammals, fish, snakes, wildlife, and so forth.  
  
Zoology serves a a common and useful undergraduate major for many medical students because it provides a valuable foundation for understanding human physiology, anatomy, genetics, embryology, and pathology.
+
Zoology serves a common and useful undergraduate major for many medical students because it provides a valuable foundation for understanding human physiology, anatomy, genetics, embryology, and pathology.
  
 
== Systems of classification ==
 
== Systems of classification ==
Line 33: Line 31:
 
As the science of describing, naming, and classifying living and extinct organisms, taxonomy is integral to the discipline of zoology. The study of animals requires that zoologists are clear on the name, description, and classification of their subjects. In order to standardize such matters, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) was created. The ICZN is a set of rules in zoology to provide the maximum universality and continuity in classifying animals according to taxonomic judgment.
 
As the science of describing, naming, and classifying living and extinct organisms, taxonomy is integral to the discipline of zoology. The study of animals requires that zoologists are clear on the name, description, and classification of their subjects. In order to standardize such matters, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) was created. The ICZN is a set of rules in zoology to provide the maximum universality and continuity in classifying animals according to taxonomic judgment.
  
Animals are one of the major groups of organisms, and are classifed as the Kingdom Animalia, or Metazoa. Within this kingdom, a major division is between invertebrates and vertebrates. Invertebrates share the common lack of a trait: a vertebral column, or backbone. About 97 percent of all animal species are invertebrates. Vertebrates are animals with a backbone. With invertebrates, there are more than a dozen phyla, including Porifera (sponges), Cnidaria or Coelenterata (jellyfish, corals), Ctenophora (comb jellies), Mollusca (clams, snails, cotopuses, etc.), and Arthropoda (arthropods). Vertebrates, which are a subphylum of the phylum Chordata, include such familiar animals as fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. (For a more comprehensive discussion, see the article on [[animal]]s.)
+
Animals are one of the major groups of organisms, and are classified as the Kingdom Animalia, or Metazoa. Within this kingdom, a major division is between invertebrates and vertebrates. Invertebrates share the common lack of a trait: a vertebral column, or backbone. About 97 percent of all animal species are invertebrates. Vertebrates are animals with a backbone. With invertebrates, there are more than a dozen phyla, including Porifera (sponges), Cnidaria or Coelenterata (jellyfish, corals), Ctenophora (comb jellies), Mollusca (clams, snails, otopuses, etc.), and Arthropoda ([[arthropod]]s). Vertebrates, which are a subphylum of the phylum Chordata, include such familiar animals as fish, amphibians, [[reptile]]s, [[bird]]s, and [[mammal]]s. For a more comprehensive discussion, see the article on [[animal]]s.  
 
 
Morphography includes the systematic exploration and tabulation of the facts involved in the recognition of all the recent and extinct kinds of animals and their distribution in space and time. The museum-makers of olden times and their modern representatives the curators and describers of zoological collections, the early explorers and the modern naturalists and writers on zoogeography, and (3) the collectors of [[fossil]]s and present-day [[palaeontologist]]s are the chief varieties of zoological workers coming under this heading. Gradually, since the time of John Hunter and [[Georges Cuvier]], anatomical study has associated itself with the more superficial morphography until today no one considers a study of animal form of much value if it does not include internal structure, [[histology]] and [[embryology]] in its scope.
 
[[Image:General Scheme of Animals, Cyclopaedia, 1728, volume 1, page 101.jpg|thumb|right|300px|General scheme of animal categorization, from the ''[[Cyclopaedia]]'', 1728.]]
 
  
==History of zoology before Darwin==
+
Morphography includes the systematic exploration and tabulation of the facts involved in the recognition of all the recent and extinct kinds of animals and their distribution in space and time. The museum-makers of olden times and their modern representatives, the curators and describers of zoological collections; the early explorers and the modern naturalists and writers on zoogeography; and the collectors of [[fossil]]s and present-day [[paleontologist]]s are the chief varieties of zoological workers coming under this heading. Gradually, since the time of John Hunter and [[Georges Cuvier]], anatomical study has associated itself with the more superficial morphography until today no one considers a study of animal form of much value if it does not include internal structure, [[histology]], and [[embryology]] in its scope.
 +
[[Image:General Scheme of Animals, Cyclopaedia, 1728, volume 1, page 101.jpg|thumb|right|300px|General scheme of animal categorization, from the ''[[Cyclopaedia]],'' 1728.]]
  
Humans have been fascinated by the animal kingdom throughout history. In early [[Europe]], they gathered up and treasured stories of strange animals from distant lands or deep seas, such as are recorded in the ''Physiologus'', in the works of Albertus Magnus (''On Animals''), and others. These accounts were often [[apocryphal]] and creatures were often described as "legendary." This period was succeeded by the age of collectors and travelers, when many of the stories were actually demonstrated as true when the living or preserved specimens were brought to Europe.
+
==History of zoology==
  
===The rise of the naturalist===
+
===Zoology in ancient times===
  
Verification by collecting of things, instead of the accumulation of anecdotes, then became more common, and scholars developed a new faculty of careful observation. The early collectors of natural curiosities were the founders of [[zoology]], and to this day naturalists, museum curators, and [[systematics|systematists]], play an important part in the progress of zoology. Indeed, the historical importance of this aspect of zoology was previously so great that the name ''zoology'' had until the beginning of the 20th century been associated entirely with it, to the exclusion of the study of minute anatomical structure ([[anatomy]]) and function ([[physiology]]).  
+
Humans have been fascinated by the animal kingdom throughout history. From the very beginning, people must have had knowledge about animals that made them capable in hunting, knowing which animals were dangerous, and in domesticating animals.  
  
Anatomy and the study of animal mechanism, animal physics, and animal chemistry were initially excluded from the usual definition of the word by the fact that zoologists had museums, unlike botanists who possessed living specimens.  Early zoologists were deprived of the means of anatomical and physiological study, which was later supplied by the method of preserving animal bodies in [[alcohol]] when the demands of [[medicine]] for a knowledge of the structure of the human animal brought into existence a separate and special study of [[human]] anatomy and physiology.
+
In ancient [[India]], texts described some aspects of bird life, and in [[Egypt]], the metamorphosis of insects and frogs was described. Egyptians and Babylonians also knew of anatomy and physiology in various forms. In ancient [[Mesopotamia]], animals were sometimes kept in what can be described as the first zoological gardens.
  
Scientists who studied the structure of the human body were able to compare human anatomical structures with those of other animals. Comparative anatomy came into existence as a branch of inquiry apart from zoology, and it was only in the latter part of the 19th century that the limitation of the word zoology to a knowledge of animals that expressly excludes the consideration of their internal structure was rejected by scientists.  
+
In the Greco-Roman world, scholars became more interested in rationalist methods. Greek scientist and philosopher [[Aristotle]], during the 300s B.C.E., described many animals and their behaviors, and devoted considerable attention to categorizing them. In ancient Rome, [[Pliny the Elder]] is known for his knowledge of nature. Later, Claudius [[Galen]] became a pioneer in medicine and anatomy.
  
===16th century developments===
+
In early [[Europe]], stories of strange animals from distant lands or deep seas were not uncommon, and were recorded in such works as ''Physiologus,'' and the works of Albertus Magnus ''On Animals,'' among others. These accounts were often apocryphal and creatures were often described as "legendary." This period was succeeded by the age of collectors and travelers, when many of the stories were actually demonstrated as true when the living or preserved specimens were brought to Europe.
  
Scientific zoology advanced in the 16th century with the awakening of the new spirit of observation and exploration; however, for a long time it ran a separate course uninfluenced by the progress of the [[medicine|medical]] studies of anatomy and physiology. The active search for knowledge by means of observation and experiment found its natural home in the universities. Owing to the connection of medicine with these seats of learning, it was natural that the study of the structure and functions of the human body and of the animals nearest to humans should take root there; the spirit of inquiry which now for the first time became general showed itself in the anatomical schools of the [[Italy|Italian]] universities of the 16th century, and spread fifty years later to the University of Oxford.
+
===The rise of the naturalist===
  
===17th and 18th century developments===
+
Over time, verification by collecting of things, instead of the accumulation of anecdotes, became more common, and scholars developed the faculty of careful observation. The early collectors of natural curiosities might be considered the founders of the scientific discipline of zoology, and to this day naturalists, museum curators, and [[systematics|systematists]], play an important part in the progress of zoology. Indeed, the historical importance of this aspect of zoology was previously so great that, until the beginning of the twentieth century, the name ''zoology'' had been associated entirely with it, to the exclusion of the study of anatomical structure or [[anatomy]] and function or [[physiology]].
  
In the 17th century, adherents of the new philosophy of investigation of nature by means of observation and experiment, banded themselves into academies or societies for mutual support and dialogue. The first founded of surviving European academies, the Academia Naturae Curiosorum (1651) especially confined itself to the description and illustration of the structure of plants and animals; eleven years later (1662), the Royal Society of London was incorporated by royal charter, having existed without a name or fixed organization for seventeen years previously (from 1645).
+
Unlike botanists, who possessed living specimens, early zoologists had museums, and were handicapped in the means of anatomical and physiological study. This was later ameliorated by the method of preserving animal bodies in [[alcohol]], when the demands of [[medicine]] for a knowledge of the structure of the human animal brought into existence a separate and special study of human anatomy and physiology.
  
Later, the Academy of Sciences of [[Paris]] was established by [[Louis XIV of France|Louis XIV]]. The influence of these great academies of the 17th century on the progress of zoology was precisely to effect that bringing together of the museum curators and the physicians or anatomists, which was needed for further development. While collectors and systematisers gained prominence in the latter part of the 18th century, notably in [[Carolus Linnaeus|Linnaeus]], a new type of scientist appeared in such men as John Hunter and other anatomists, who, not satisfied with the superficial observations of the popular zoologists, set themselves to work to examine anatomically the whole animal kingdom, and to classify its members by aid of the results of such study.  
+
Scientists who studied the structure of the human body were able to compare human anatomical structures with those of other animals. Comparative anatomy came into existence as a branch of inquiry apart from zoology. It was only in the latter part of the nineteenth century that the limitation of the word zoology to a knowledge of animals that expressly excludes the consideration of their internal structure was rejected by scientists.
  
Under the influence of the strict inquiry process advanced by the Royal Society, accurate observations and demonstrations of a host of new wonders accumulated, among which were numerous contributions to the anatomy of animals, and none perhaps more noteworthy than the observations, made by the aid of [[microscope]]s constructed by [[Anton van Leeuwenhoek|Leeuwenhoek]], the [[Netherlands|Dutch]] naturalist (1683).
+
The medieval period from the fifth century to early sixteenth century has often been called the dark age of biology. However, some people who dealt with medical issues were showing their interest in animals as well. In the Arab world, science about nature was kept. Many of the Greek works were translated and the knowledge of Aristotle was utilized. Of the Arab biologists, al-Jahiz, who died about 868, is particularly noteworthy. He wrote ''Kitab al Hayawan'' (''Book of animals''). In the 1200s, the German scholar named [[Albertus Magnus]] wrote ''De vegetabilibus'' (seven books) and ''De animalibus'' (26 books). He discussed in some detail the reproduction of animals.
  
===19th century developments===
+
During the [[Renaissance]], roughly from mid-1300s C.E. to early 1600s C.E., naturalists described and classified many animals, and artists such as [[Michelangelo]] and [[Leonardo da Vinci]] contributed accurate drawings of animals. Many visual artists were interested in the bodies of animals and humans and studied the physiology in detail. Such comparisons as that between a horse leg and a human leg were made. Books about animals included those by [[Conrad Gesner]], illustrated by, among others, [[Albrecht Durer|Albrecht Dürer]]. Inaccurate knowledge was still commonplace, and in many cases old legends of the Greeks were preserved.
  
It was not until the 19th century that the microscope, applied by Leeuwenhoek, Malpighi, [[Robert Hooke|Hooke]], and Swammerdam to the study of animal structure, was greatly improved as an instrument. The perfecting of the microscope led to a greater comprehension of the doctrine of [[cell (biology)|cell structure]] and the establishment of the facts that(1) all organisms are either single corpuscles ("cells") of living material (microscopic "animalcules," etc.) or are built up of an immense number of such units; (2)that all organisms begin their individual existence as a single unit or corpuscle of living substance, which multiplies by binary fission, the products growing in size and multiplying similarly by binary fission; and (3) that the processes of life should be studied via an understanding of the chemical and physical changes which go on in each individual corpuscle or unit of living material or [[protoplasm]].
+
Scientific zoology advanced in the sixteenth century with the awakening of the new spirit of observation and exploration; however, for a long time it ran a separate course uninfluenced by the progress of the [[medicine|medical]] studies of anatomy and physiology. The active search for knowledge by means of observation and experiment found its natural home in the universities. Owing to the connection of medicine with these seats of learning, it was natural that the study of the structure and functions of the human body, and of the animals nearest to humans, should take root there. The spirit of inquiry, which now for the first time became general, showed itself in the anatomical schools of the [[Italy|Italian]] universities of the sixteenth century, and spread fifty years later to the University of Oxford.
  
Meanwhile, other sciences were impacting zoology. The [[astronomy|astronomical]] theories of development of the [[solar system]] from a [[gas]]eous condition to its present form, put forward by [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]] and by [[Pierre-Simon Laplace|Laplace]], had impressed minds with the conception of a general movement of spontaneous progress or development in all nature. The science of [[geology]] came into existence, and the whole panorama of successive stages of the [[Earth]]s history, each with its distinct population of unknown [[animal]]s and [[plant]]s, unlike those of the present day and simpler in proportion as they recede into the past, was revealed by [[Georges Cuvier]], [[Louis Agassiz]], and others. The history of the crust of the earth was explained by [[Charles Lyell]] as due to a process of slow development, in not from any cataclysmic agencies or mysterious forces differing from those operating in the present day. Thus ,he carried on the narrative of orderly development from the point at which it was left by Kant and Laplace—explaining by reference to the ascertained laws of [[physics]] and [[chemistry]] the configuration of the Earth, its [[mountain]]s and [[sea]]s, its [[igneous rock|igneous]] and its [[stratified rock]]s, just as the [[astronomer]]s had explained by those same laws the evolution of the [[Sun]] and [[planet]]s from diffused [[gas]]eous matter of high temperature. The suggestion that living things must also be included in this great development became apparent.
+
===The growth of modern zoology===
  
==Zoology and Darwin==
+
In the seventeenth century, adherents of the new philosophy of investigation of nature by means of observation and experiment banded themselves into academies or societies for mutual support and dialogue. The first founded of surviving European academies, the Academia Naturae Curiosorum (1651), especially confined itself to the description and illustration of the structure of plants and animals. Eleven years later (1662), the Royal Society of London was incorporated by royal charter, having existed without a name or fixed organization for seventeen years previously (from 1645).
  
''Main article: [[Charles Darwin]]
+
[[image:Anton van Leeuwenhoek.png|thumb|200px|[[Anton van Leeuwenhoek]]]]
  
In [[1859]], [[Charles Darwin]], with his publication of ''The Origin of Species'', placed the theory of organic evolution on a new footing, by his marshalling of evidence for evolution by descent with modification, and a presentation of a process by which it could occur, the theory of natural selection. Darwin's theories revolutionised the zoological and botanical sciences.  
+
Later, the Academy of Sciences of [[Paris]] was established by [[Louis XIV of France|Louis XIV]]. These great academies of the seventeenth century affected the progress of zoology by bringing together the museum curators and the physicians or anatomists. While collectors and systematists gained prominence in the latter part of the eighteenth century, notably in [[Carolus Linnaeus|Linnaeus]], a new type of scientist appeared in such men as John Hunter and other anatomists, who, not satisfied with the superficial observations of the popular zoologists, set themselves to work to examine anatomically the whole animal kingdom, and to classify its members by aid of such study.  
  
The area of biological knowledge that Darwin subjected to the scientific method and involved the various branches of biology, related to the breeding of animals and plants, their congenital variations, and the transmission and perpetuation of those variations. This branch of biological science may be called thremmatology—the science of [[breeding]]. Outside the scientific world, an immense mass of observation and experiment had grown up in relation to this subject. From the earliest times the shepherd, the farmer, the horticulturist, and the fancier had for practical purposes made themselves acquainted with a number of biological laws, and successfully applied them without exciting more than an occasional notice from the academic students of biology. Darwin made use of these observations and formulated their results to a large extent as the laws of variation and [[heredity]]. As the breeder selects a congenital variation which suits his requirements, and by breeding from the animals (or plants) exhibiting that variation obtains a new breed characterised by that variation, so Darwin proposed that in nature there a selection among the congenital variations of each generation of a species.  
+
In the middle and late 1600s, the pioneering use of the microscope led to insights on physiology, such as observations on blood by [[Marcello Malphighi]], and on minute organisms by [[Robert Hooke]], who published ''Micrographia'' in 1665, based on his observations using a compound microscope. Hooke described the compartments of cork tissue as "cells." [[Anton van Leeuwenhoek]] (1632–1723), who made more than 400 microscopes himself, was the first person to view single-celled microbes.
  
This selection depends on the fact that more young are born than will survive to reproduce, yielding a struggle for existence and a survival of the fittest. In the process, selection either maintains accurately the form of the species from generation to generation or leads to its modification in correspondence with changes in the surrounding circumstances that have relation to its fitness for success in the struggle for life.
+
Systematizing and classifying dominated biology throughout much of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
*
 
  
It cannot be said that previously to Darwin there had been any very profound study of teleology, but it had been the delight of a certain type of mind, that of the lovers of nature or naturalists par excellence as they were sometimes termed, to watch the habits of living animals and plants and to point out the remarkable ways in which the structure of each variety of organic life was adapted to the special circumstances of life of the variety or species. The astonishing colours and grotesque forms of some animals and plants which the museum zoologists gravely described without comment were shown by these observers of living nature to have their significance in the economy of the organism possessing them; and a general doctrine was recognized, to the effect that no part or structure of an organism is without definite use and adaptation, being designed by the Creator for the benefit of the creature to which it belongs, or else for the benefit, amusement or instruction of his highest creatureman. Teleology in this form of the doctrine of design was never very deeply rooted amongst scientific anatomists and systematists. It was considered permissible to speculate somewhat vaguely on the subject of the utility of this or that startling variety of structure; but few attempts, though some of great importance, were made systematically to explain by observation and experiment the adaptation of organic structures to particular purposes in the case of the lower animals and plants. Teleology had, indeed, an important part in the development of physiology - the knowledge of the mechanism, the physical and chemical properties, of the parts of the body of man and the higher animals allied to him. But, as applied to lower and more obscure forms of life, teleology presented almost insurmountable difficulties; and consequently, in place of exact experiment and demonstration, the most reckless though ingenious assumptions were made as to the utility of the parts and organs of lower animals.
+
[[Carolus Linnaeus]] (1707–1778), a [[Sweden|Swedish]] [[botany|botanist]], developed a classification for animals based on shared characteristics. His new system greatly standardized the rules for grouping and naming animals and plants.  
  
Darwin's theory had as one of its results the reformation and rehabilitation of teleology. According to that theory, every organ, every part, color and peculiarity of an organism, must either be of benefit to that organism itself or have been so to its ancestors: no peculiarity of structure or general conformation, no habit or instinct in any organism, can be supposed to exist for the benefit or amusement of another organism, not even for the delectation of man himself.
+
At this time, the long-held idea that living organisms could originate from nonliving matter (spontaneous generation) began to crumble, particularly through the work of [[Louis Pasteur]] (1822–1895).  
  
A very subtle and important qualification of this generalization has to be recognized (and was recognized by Darwin) in the fact that owing to the interdependence of the parts of the bodies of living things and their profound chemical interactions and peculiar structural balance (what is called organic polarity) the variation of one single part (a spot of colour, a tooth, a claw, a leaflet) may, and demonstrably does in many cases entail variation of other parts what are called correlated variations. Hence many structures which are obvious to the eye, and serve as distinguishing marks of separate species, are really not themselves of value or use, btit are the necessary concomitants of less obvious and even altogether obscure qualities, which are the real characters upon which selection is acting. Such correlated variations may attain to great size and complexity without being of use. But eventually they may in turn become, in changed conditions, of selective value. Thus in many cases the difficulty of supposing that selection has acted on minute and imperceptible initial variations, so small as to have no selective value, may be got iid of. A useless correlated variation  may have attained great volume and quality before it is (as it were) seized upon and perfected by natural selection. All organisms are essentially and necessarily built up by such correlated variations.
+
It was not until the nineteenth century that the microscope, applied earlier by [[Leeuwenhoek]], Malpighi, Hooke, and Swammerdam to the study of animal structure, was greatly improved as an instrument. The perfecting of the microscope led to a greater comprehension of the doctrine of [[cell (biology)|cell structure]] and the establishment of the facts that (1) all organisms are either single corpuscles ("cells") of living material (microscopic "animalcules," etc.), or are built up of an immense number of such units; and (2) that all organisms begin their individual existence as a single unit or corpuscle of living substance, which multiplies by binary fission, the products growing in size and multiplying similarly by binary fission.
  
Necessarily, according to the theory of natural selection, structures either are present because they are selected as useful or because they are still inherited from ancestors to whom they were useful, though no longer useful to the existing representatives of those ancestors. Structures previously inexplicable were now explained as survivals from a past age, no longer useful though once of value. Every variety of form and colour was urgently and absolutely called upon to produce its title to existence either as an active useful agent or as a survival. Darwin himself spent a large part of the later years of his life in thus extending the new teleology.
+
In the later part of the nineteenth century, the area of [[genetics]] developed, when the [[Austria]]n [[monk]] [[Gregor Mendel]] formulated his laws of inheritance, published in 1866. However, the significance his work was not recognized until a few decades afterward.  
  
The old doctrine of types, which was used by the philosophically minded zoologists (and botanists) of the first half of the 19th century as a ready means of explaining the failures and difficulties of the doctrine of design, fell into its proper place under the new dispensation. The adherence to type, the favourite conception. of the transcendental morphologist, was seen to be nothing more than the expression of one of the laws of thremmatology, the persistence of hereditary transmission of ancestral characters, even when they have ceased to be significant or valuable in the struggle for existence, whilst the so-called evidences of design which was supposed to modify the limitations of types assigned to Himself by the Creator were seen to be adaptations due to the selection and intensification by selective breeding of fortuitous congenital variations, which happened to prove more useful than the many thousand other variations which did not survive in the struggle for existence.
+
During this time, other sciences were impacting zoology. The [[astronomy|astronomical]] theories of development of the [[solar system]] from a [[gas]]eous condition to its present form, put forward by [[Immanuel Kant|Kant]] and by [[Pierre-Simon Laplace|Laplace]], had impressed minds with the conception of a general movement of spontaneous progress or development in all nature. The science of [[geology]] came into existence, and the whole panorama of successive stages of the [[Earth]]’s history, each with its distinct population of unknown [[animal]]s and [[plant]]s, unlike those of the present day and simpler in proportion as they recede into the past, was revealed by [[Georges Cuvier]], [[Louis Agassiz]], and others. The history of the crust of the earth was explained by [[Charles Lyell]] as due to a process of slow development, and not from any cataclysmic agencies or mysterious forces differing from those operating in the present day. Thus, Lyell carried on the narrative of orderly development from the point at which it was left by Kant and Laplace—explaining by reference to the ascertained laws of [[physics]] and [[chemistry]], the configuration of the Earth, its [[mountain]]s and [[sea]]s, its [[igneous rock|igneous]] and its [[stratified rock]]s, just as the [[astronomer]]s had explained by those same laws the evolution of the [[Sun]] and [[planet]]s from diffused [[gas]]eous matter of high temperature. The suggestion that living things must also be included in this great development became more apparent.
  
Thus not only did Darwins theory give a new basis to the study of organic structure, but, whilst rendering the general theory of organic evolution equally acceptable and necessary, it explained the existence of low and simple forms of life as survivals of the earliest ancestry of the more highly complex forms, and revealed the classifications of the systematist as unconscious attempts to construct the genealogical tree or pedigree of plants and animals. Finally, it brought the simplest living matter or formless protoplasm before the mental vision as the starting point whence, by the operation of necessary mechanical causes, the highest forms have been evolved, and it rendered unavoidable the conclusion that this earliest living material was itself evolved by gradual processes, the result also of the known and recognized laws of physics and chemistry, from material which we should call not living. It abolished the conception of life as an entity above and beyond the common properties of matter, and led to the conviction that the marvellous and exceptional qualities of that which we call living matter are nothing more nor less than an exceptionally complicated development of those chemical and physical properties which we recognize in a gradually ascending scale of evolution in the carbon compounds, containing nitrogen as well as oxygen, sulphur and hydrogen as constituent atoms of their enormous molecules. Thus mysticism was finally banished from the domain of biology, and zoology became one of the physical sciencesthe science which seeks to arrange and discuss the phenomena of animal life and form, as the outcome of the operation of the laws of physics and chemistry.
+
====Zoology and Darwin====
 +
In 1859, [[Charles Darwin]], with his publication of ''The Origin of Species,'' placed the theory of organic evolution on a new footing, by his marshalling of evidence for evolution by descent with modification, and by presentation of a process by which it could occur, the theory of natural selection. Darwin's theories revolutionized the zoological and botanical sciences.  
  
A subdivision of zoology which was at one time in favour is simply into morphology and physiology, the study of form and structure on the one hand, and the study of the activities and functions of the forms and structures of the other. But a logical division like this is not necessarily conducive to the ascertainment and remembrance of the historical progress and present significance of the science. No such distinction of mental activities as that involved in the division of the study of animal life into morphology and physiology has ever really existed: the investigator of animal forms has never entirely ignored the functions of the forms studied by him, and the experimental inquirer into the functions and properties of animal tissues and organs has always taken very careful account of the forms of those tissues and organs. A more instructive subdivision must be one which corresponds to the separate currents of thought and mental preoccupation which have been historically manifested in western Europe in the gradual evolution of what is to-day the great river of zoological doctrine to which they have all been rendered contributory.
+
[[Image:Charles Darwin.jpg|left|thumb|200px|[[Charles Darwin]], 1854]]
 +
Darwin's work intersected with the breeding of animals and plants, their congenital variations, and the transmission and perpetuation of those variations. Outside the scientific world, an immense mass of observation and experiment had grown up in relation to this subject. From the earliest times the shepherd, the farmer, the horticulturist, and the fancier had for practical purposes made themselves acquainted with a number of biological laws, and successfully applied them without exciting more than an occasional notice from the academic students of biology. Darwin made use of these observations and formulated their results to a large extent as the laws of variation and [[heredity]]. As the breeder selects a congenital variation which suits his requirements, and by breeding from the animals (or plants) exhibiting that variation obtains a new breed characterized by that variation, so Darwin proposed that in nature there is a selection among the congenital variations of each generation of a species.  
  
==History since Darwin ==
+
Natural selection depends on the fact that more young are born than will survive to reproduce, yielding a struggle for existence and a survival of the fittest. In the process, selection either maintains accurately the form of the species from generation to generation or leads to its modification in correspondence with changes in the surrounding circumstances that have relation to its fitness for success in the struggle for life. According to the theory of natural selection, structures either are present because they are selected as useful or because they are inherited from ancestors to whom they were useful, though no longer useful to the existing representatives of those ancestors.
  
[[Charles Darwin]] gave new stimulus and new direction to [[Morphology (biology)|morphology]] and [[physiology]], by uniting them as part of a common biological theory: the theory of organic evolution  but a part of the wider doctrine of universal evolution based on the laws of [[physics]] and [[chemistry]]. The immediate result was, a reconstruction of the classification of animals upon a [[genealogical]] basis, and an investigation of the individual development of animals, and early attempts to determine their genetic relationships.  
+
Darwin's theory gave a new basis to the study of organic structure, and directed the classifications of the systematist toward construction of the genealogical tree or pedigree of plants and animals. Darwin's theory also countered a conception of life as an entity above and beyond the common properties of matter, leading to the movement toward the materialistic view that the marvelous and exceptional qualities of living matter are nothing more nor less than an exceptionally complicated development of those chemical and physical properties under guidance of non-progressive, purposeless evolution.
  
''Warning: this is largely based on the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, and contains several errors.''
+
===Twentieth Century===
 +
[[Gregor Mendel]]'s experiments hybridizing certain cultivated varieties of plants were presented in 1865 and published in 1866, but failed to attract notice until thirty-five years later in the early twentieth century, sixteen years after his death. Mendel's object was to gain a better understanding of the principles of [[heredity]]. Mendel made his chief experiments with cultivated varieties of the self-fertilizing edible [[pea]]. When the importance of Mendel's work was realized, it led to the merging of Darwinian theories with an understanding of heredity, resulting in the "modern evolutionary synthesis" or [[neo-Darwinism]]. The modern synthesis was integral to the development of much of zoology in the twentieth century.
  
===Early 20th century work===
+
Among the exciting twentieth-century breakthroughs in genetics and molecular biology was the recognition of DNA as the means to pass on hereditary traits. By 1953, [[James Watson]] and [[Francis Crick]] clarified the basic structure of [[DNA]], the genetic material for expressing [[life]] in all of its forms.
The studies which occupied Darwin himself subsequent to the publication of the ''[[Origin of Species]]'', that is the explanations of animal and plant mechanisms, coloring, habits, which confer advantages to the individuals within a species, were only gradually being carried further in the early [[20th century]].  Much important work in this direction was done by [[Fritz Muller]] (''Für Darwin''), by [[Herman Muller]] (''Fertilization of Plants by Insects''), by [[August Weismann]] (memoirs translated by Meldola) by Edward B. Poulton (see his addresses and memoirs published in the Transactions of the Entomological Society and elsewhere), and by Abbot Thayer (''Concealing Coloration in the Animal Kingdom'', Macmillan & Co., 1910).  
 
  
In the field of what would become known as [[genetics]], the laws of variation and [[heredity]] (originally known as ''thremmatology''), there was considerable progress during this period.  The progress of microscopy during this era began to give a clearer understanding of the structural facts connected with the origin of the [[Ovum|egg]]-cell and [[sperm]]-cell and the process of [[fertilization]].
+
After the success of the discovery of the structure of DNA, Crick turned to the problem of consciousness; in the meantime, the studies of [[developmental biology]] came to the forefront. More recently, [[Cloning|clone]]s of both [[plant]]s and [[animal]]s have been attempted, with some success, but with attendant ethical questions.  
  
===Mendel and zoology===
+
The twentieth century also saw the development of the new sciences of animal ecology and animal behavior.  
[[Gregor Mendel]]'s experiments hybridizing certain cultivated varieties of plants were published in 1865, but failed to attract notice until thirty-five years later in the early [[20th century]], sixteen years after his death (see [[Mendelism]]). Mendel's object was to gain a better understanding of the principles of [[heredity]].
 
Mendel made his chief experiments with cultivated varieties of the self-fertilizing edible [[pea]]. He selected a variety with one marked structural feature and crossed it with another variety in which that feature was absent.
 
  
Instances of his selected varieties are the tall variety which he hybridized with a dwarf variety, a yellow-seeded variety which he hybridized with a green-seeded variety, and again a smooth-seeded variety which he hybridized with a wrinkle-seeded variety. In each set of experiments he concentrated his attention on the one character selected for observation. Having obtained a first hybrid generation, he allowed the hybrids to self-fertilize, and recorded the result in a large number of instances (a thousand or more) as to the number of individuals in the first, second, third, and fourth generations in which the character selected for experiment made its appearance.
+
The beginnings of animal ecology can be traced to the early twentieth century, with the work of [[R. Hesse]] of [[Germany]] and [[Charles Elton]] of [[England]] (Smith 1996). In the [[United States]], [[Charles Adams]] and [[Victor Shelford]] were pioneering animal ecologists, with Adams publishing the first textbook on animal ecology, and Shelford emphasizing plant-animal interactions.  
<!-- copyedited to update article with current knowledge readers to this point, please move this marker down, if you copyedit further —>
 
In the first hybrid generation formed by the union of the reproductive germs of the positive variety (that possessing the structural character selected for observation) with those of the negative variety, it is not surprising that all or nearly all the individuals were found to exhibit, as a result of the mixture, the positive character. In subsequent generations produced by self-fertilization of the hybrids it was found that the positive character was not present in all the individuals, but that a result was obtained showing that in the formation of the reproductive cells (ova and sperms) of the hybrid, half were endowed with the positive character and half with the negative. Consequently the result of the haphazard pairing of a large number of these two groups of reproductive cells was to yield, according to the regular law of chance combination, the proportion 1 PP, 2 PN, 1 NN, where P stands for the positive character and N for its absence or negative character - the positive character being accordingly present in three-fourths of the offspring and absent from one-fourth.
 
  
The fact that in the formation of the reproductive cells of the hybrid generation the material which carries the positive quality is not subdivided so as to give a half-quantity to each reproductive cell, but on the contrary is apparently distributed as an undivided whole to half only of the reproductive cells and not at all to the remainder, is the important inference from Mendel's experiments. Whether this inference is applicable to other classes of cases than those studied by Mendel and his followers is a question which is still under investigation.
+
Although the formal study of animal behavior began in the nineteenth century with George J. Romanes, in the twentieth century it grew prominent, developing along four major lines: ''behaviorism,'' the study of behavior mechanism; ''ethology,'' the study of the function and evolution of behavior; ''behavioral ecology,'' the investigation of how animals interact with their biotic and abiotic environment, with emphasis on the influence of natural selection; and ''sociobiology,'' a controversial discipline, pioneered by [[Edward Osborne Wilson]], that applied the principles of evolutionary biology to animal social behavior, and ultimately to humans (Smith 1996).  
 
 
The failure of the material carrying a positive character to divide so as to distribute itself among all the reproductive cells of a hybrid individual, and the limitation of its distribution to half only of those cells, must prevent the swamping of a newly appearing character in the course of the inter-breeding of those individuals possessed of the character with those which do not possess it. The tendency of the proportions in the offspring of 1 PP, 2 PN, 1 NN is to give in a series of generations a regular reversion from the hybrid form PN to the two pure races, viz, the race with the positive character simply and the race with the total absence of it. It has been maintained that this tendency to a severance of the hybrid stock into its components must favour the persistence of a new character of large volume suddenly appearing in a stock, and the observations of Mendel have been held to favour in this way the views of those who hold that the variations upon which natural selection has acted in the production of new species are not small variations but large and  discontinuous. It does not, however, appear that large variations would thus be favoured any more than small ones, nor that the eliminating action of natural selection upon an unfavourable variation could be checked.
 
 
 
A good deal of confusion has arisen in the discussions of this latter topic, owing to defective nomenclature. By some writers the word ''mutation'' is applied only to large and suddenly appearing variations which are found to he capable of hereditary transmission, whilst the term  ''fluctuation''  is applied to small variations whether capable of transmission or not. By others the word ''fluctuation'' is apparently applied only to those small acquired variations due to the direct action of changes in food, moisture and other features of the environment. It is no discovery that this latter kind of variation is not hereditable, and it is not the fact that the small variations, to which Darwin attached great but not exclusive importance as the material upon which natural selection operates, are of this latter kind. The most instructive classification of the  variations exhibited by fully formed organisms consists in the separation in the first place of those which arise from antecedent congenital, innate, constitutional, or germinal variations from those which arise merely from the operation of variation of the environment or the food-supply upon normally constituted individuals. The former are innate variations, the latter are superimposed variations (so-called  acquired variations). Both innate and superimposed variations are capable of division into those which are more and those which are less obvious to the human eye. Scarcely perceptible variations of the innate class are regularly and invariably present in every new generation of every species of living thing. Their greatness or smallness so far as human perception goes is not of much significance; their real importance in regard to the origin of new species depends on whether they are of value to the organism and therefore capable of selection in the struggle for existence. An absolutely imperceptible physiological difference arising as a variation may be of selective value, and it may carry with it correlated variations which appeal to the human eye but are of no selective value themselves. The present writer has, for many years, urged the importance of this consideration.
 
 
 
The views of [[Hugo de Vries]] and others as to the importance of saltatory variation, the soundness of which was still by no means generally accepted in 1910, may be gathered from the articles [[Mendelism]] and [[variation]]. A due appreciation of the far-reaching results of  correlated variation  must, it appears, give a new and distinct explanation to the phenomena which are referred to as large mutations,  discontinuous variation,  and  saltatory evolution. Whatever value is to be attached to Mendel's observation of the breaking up of self-fertilized hybrids of cultivated varieties into the two original parent forms according to the formula  1 PP, 2 PN, 1 NN, it cannot be considered as more than a contribution to the extensive investigation of heredity which still remains to be carried out. The analysis of the specific variations of organic form so as to determine what is really the nature and limitation of a single  character  or individual variation, and whether two such true and strictly-defined single variations of a single structural unit can actually blend when one is transmitted by the male parent and the other by the female parent, are matters which have yet to be determined. We do not yet know whether such absolute blending is possible or not, or whether all apparent blending is only a more or less minutely subdivided mosaic of non-combinable characters of the parents, in fact whether the combinations due to heredity in reproduction are ever analogous to chemical compounds or are always comparable to particulate mixtures.
 
 
 
The attempt to connect Mendel's observation with the structure of the sperm-cells and egg-cells of plants and animals has already been made. The suggestion is obvious that the halving of the number of nuclear threads in the reproductive cells as compared with the number of those present in the ordinary cells of the tissues, as a phenomenon which has now been demonstrated as universal, may he directly connected with the facts of segregation of hybrid characters observed by Mendel. The suggestion requires further experimental testing, for which the case of the [[parthenogenesis|parthenogenetic]] production of a portion of the offspring, in such insects as the [[bee]], offers a valuable opportunity for research.
 
 
 
Another important development of Darwin's conclusions deserves special notice here, as it is the most distinct advance in the department of [[bionomics]] since Darwin's own writings, and at the same time touches questions of fundamental interest. The matter strictly relates to the consideration of the  causes of variation, and is as follows. The fact of variation is a familiar one. No two animals, even of the same brood, are alike: whilst exhibiting a close similarity to their parents, they yet present differences, sometimes very marked differences, from their parents and from one another. [[Jean-Baptiste Lamarck]] had put forward the hypothesis that structural alterations acquired by (that is to say, superimposed upon) a parent in the course of its life are transmitted to the offspring, and that, as these structural alterations are acquired by an animal or plant in consequence of the direct action of the environment, the offspring inheriting them would as a consequence not unfrequently start with a greater fitness for those conditions than its parents started with. In its turn, being operated upon by the conditions of life, it would acquire a greater development of the same modification, which it would in turn transmit to its offspring. In the course of several generations, Lamarck argued, a structural alteration amounting to such difference as we call specific might be thus acquired. The familiar illustration of Lamarck's hypothesis is that of the [[giraffe]], whose long neck might, he suggested, has been acquired by the efforts of a primitively short-necked race of [[herbivore]]s who stretched their necks to reach the foliage of trees in a land where grass was deficient, the effort producing a distinct elongation in the neck of each generation, which was then transmitted to the next. This process is known as direct adaptation; there is no doubt that such structural adaptations are acquired by an animal in the course of its life, though such changes are strictly limited in degree and rare rather than frequent and obvious.
 
 
 
Whether such acquired characters can be transmitted to the next generation is a separate question. It was not proved by Lamarck that they can be and, indeed, never has been proved by actual observation. Nevertheless it has been assumed, and also indirectly argued, that such acquired characters must be transmitted. Darwin's great merit was that he excluded from his theory of development any necessary assumption of the transmission of acquired characters. He pointed to the admitted fact of congenital variation, and he showed that congenital variations are arbitrary and, so to speak, non-significant.
 
 
 
====Congenital variation====
 
Their causes are extremely difficult to trace in detail, but it appears that they are largely due to a shaking up of the living matter which constitutes the fertilized germ or embryo-cell, by the process of mixture in it of the substance of two cells - the germ cell and the sperm-cell - derived from two different individuals. Other mechanical disturbances may assist in this production of congenital variation. Whatever its causes, Darwin showed that it is all-important. In some cases a pair of animals produce ten million offspring, and in such a number a large range of congenital variation is possible. Since on the average only two of the young survive in the struggle for existence to take the place of their two parents, there is a selection out of the ten million young, none of which are exactly alike, and the selection is determined in nature by the survival of the congenital variety which is fittest to the conditions of life. Hence there is no necessity for an assumption of the perpetuation of direct adaptations. The selection of the fortuitously (fortuitously, that is to say, so far as the conditions of survival are concerned) produced varieties is sufficient, since it is ascertained that they will tend to transmit those characters with which they themselves were born, although it is not ascertained that they could transmit charcharacters acquired on the way through life. A simple illustration of the difference is this: a man born with four fingers only on his right hand is ascertained to be likely to transmit this peculiarity to some at least of his offspring; on the other hand, there is not the slightest ground for supposing that a man who has had one finger chopped off, or has even lost his arm at any period of his life, will produce offspring who are defective in the slightest degree in regard to fingers, hand, or arm. Darwin himself, influenced by the consideration of certain classes of facts which seem to favour the Lamarckian hypothesis, was of the opinion that acquired characters are in some cases transmitted. It should be observed, however, that Darwin did not attribute an essential part to this Lamarckian hypothesis of the transmission of acquired characters, but expressly assigned to it an entirely subordinate importance.
 
 
 
The new attitude which has been taken since Darwin's writings on this question is to ask for evidence of the asserted transmission of acquired characters. It is held that the Darwinian doctrine of selection of fortuitous congenital variations is sufficient to account for all cases, that the Lamarckian hypothesis of transmission of acquired characters is not supported by experimental evidence, and that the latter should therefore be dismissed. [[August Weismann]] has also ingeniously argued from the structure of the egg-cell and sperm-cell, and from the way in which, and the period at which, they are derived in the course of the growth of the embryo from the egg - from the fertilized egg-cell - that it is impossible (it would be better to say highly improbable) that an alteration in parental structure could produce any exactly representative change in the substance of the germ or sperm-cells.
 
 
 
The one fact which the Lamarckians can produce in their favour is the account of experiments by [[Brown-Séquard]], in which he produced [[epilepsy]] in [[guinea-pig]]s by bisection of the large nerves or spinal cord, and in the course of which he was led to believe that in a few rare instances the artificially-produced epilepsy and mutilation of the nerves was transmitted. This instance does not stand the test of criticism. The record of Brown-Séquard's original experiment is not satisfactory, and the subsequent attempts to obtain similar results have not been attended with success. On the other hand, the vast number of experiments in the cropping of the tails and ears of domestic animals, as well as of similar operations on man, are attended with negative results. No case of the transmission of the results of an injury can be produced. Stories of tailess kittens, puppies, and calves, born from parents one of whom had been thus injured, are abundant, but they have, hitherto entirely failed to stand before examination.
 
 
 
Whilst simple evidence of the fact of the transmission of an acquired character is wanting, the ''a priori'' arguments in its favour break down one after another when discussed. The very cases which are advanced as only to be explained on the Lamarckian assumption are found on examination and experiment to be better explained, or only to be explained, by the Darwinian principle. Thus the occurrence of blind animals in caves and in the deep sea was a fact which Darwin himself regarded as best-explained by the atrophy of the organ of vision in successive generations through the absence of light and consequent disuse, and the transmission (as Lamarck would have supposed) of a more and more weakened and structurally impaired eye to the offspring in successive generations, until the eye finally disappeared. But this instance is really fully explained (as the present writer has shown) by the theory of natural selection acting on congenital fortuitous variations. It is definitely ascertained that many animals are thus born with distorted or defective eyes whose parents have not had their eyes submitted to any peculiar conditions. Supposing a number of some species of arthropod or fish to be swept into a cavern or to be carried from less to greater depths in the sea, those individuals with perfect eyes would follow the glimmer of light and eventually escape to the outer air or the shallower depths, leaving behind those with imperfect eyes to breed in the dark place. A natural selection would thus he effected. In every succeeding generation this would be the case, and even those with weak but still seeing eyes would in the course of time escape, until only a pure race of eyeless or blind animals would be left in the cavern or deep sea.
 
 
 
====Educability====
 
It is a remarkable fact that it was overlooked alike by the supporters and opponents of Lamarck's views until pointed out by the present writer (Nature, 1894, p. 127), that the two statements called by Lamarck his first and second laws are contradictory one of the other. Lamarck's first law asserts that a past of indefinite duration is powerless to create a bias by which the present can be controlled. He declares that in spite of long-established conditions and correspondingly evoked characters new conditions will cause new responsive characters. Yet in the second law he asserts that these new characters will resist the action of yet newer conditions or a reversion to the old conditions and be maintained by heredity. If the earlier characters were not maintained by heredity why should the later be? If a character of much longer standing (certain properties of height, length, breadth, colour, etc.) had not become fixed and congenital after many thousands of successive generations of individuals had developed it in response to environment, but gave place to a new character when new moulding conditions operated on an individual (Lamarck's first law), why should we suppose that the new character is likely to become fixed and transmitted by mere heredity after a much shorter time of existence in response to environmental stimulus? Why should we assume that it will be able to escape the moulding by environment (once its evoking cause is removed) to which, according to Lamarck's first law, all parts of organisms are subject? Clearly Lamarck gives us no reason for any such assumption, and his followers or latter-day adherents have not attempted to do so. His enunciation of his theory is itself destructive of that theory. Though an acquired or superimposed  character is not transmitted to offspring as the consequence of the action of the external agencies which determine the acquirement, yet the tendency to react to such agencies possessed by the parent is transmitted and may be increased and largely developed by survival, if the character developed by the reaction is valuable. This newly-discovered inheritance of variation in the tendency to react has a wide application and has led the present writer to coin the word ''educability''. It has application to all kinds of organs and qualities, but is of especial significance in regard to the development of the brain and the mental qualities of animals and of man (see the jubilee volume of the ''Soc. de Biologie'', 1899, and ''Nature'', 1900, p. 624).
 
 
 
====Transmission====
 
It has been argued that the elaborate structural adaptations of the nervous system which are the corporeal correlatives of complicated instincts must have been slowly built up by the transmission to offspring of acquired experience, that is to say, of acquired brain structure. At first sight it appears difficult to understand how the complicated series of actions which are definitely exhibited as so-called instincts by a variety of animals can have been due to the selection of congenital variations, or can be otherwise explained than by the transmission of habits acquired by the parent as the result of experience, and continuously elaborated and added to in successive generations. It is, however, to be noted, in the first place, that the imitation of the parent by the young possibly accounts for some part of these complicated actions and, secondly, that there are cases in which curiously elaborate actions are performed by animals as a characteristic of the species, and as subserving the general advantage of the race or species which, nevertheless, can not be explained as resulting from the transmission of acquired experience, and must be supposed to be due to the natural selection of a fortuitously-developed habit which, like fortuitous colour or form variation, happens to prove beneficial. Such cases are the habits of shamming dead and the combined posturing and colour peculiarities of certain caterpillars ([[Lepidoptera]] larvae) which cause them to resemble dead twigs or similar surrounding objects. The advantage to the animal of this imitation of surrounding objects is that it escapes the pursuit of (say) a bird which would, were it not deceived by the resemblance, attack and eat the caterpillar. Now it is clear that preceding generations of caterpillars cannot have acquired this habit of posturing by experience. Either the caterpillar postures and escapes, or it does not posture and is eaten; it is not half eaten and allowed to profit by experience. We seem to be justified in assuming that there are many movements of stretching and posturing possible to caterpillars, and that some caterpillars had a congenital fortuitous tendency to one position, some to another and, finally that among all the variety of habitual movements thus exhibited one has been selected and perpetuated because it coincided with the necessary conditions of safety, since it happened to give the caterpillar an increased resemblance to a twig.
 
 
 
The view that instinct is the hereditarily-fixed result of habit derived from experience long dominated all inquiry into the subject, but we may now expect to see a renewed and careful study of animal instincts carried out with the view of testing the applicability to each instance of the pure Darwinian theory without the aid of Lamarckism.
 
 
 
====Record of the past====
 
Nothing can be further from the truth than the once-favourite theory that instincts are the survivals of lapsed reasoning processes. Instincts, or the inherited structural mechanisms of the nervous centres, are in antagonism to the results of the reasoning process, which are not capable of hereditary transmission. Every higher vertebrate animal possesses the power of forming for itself a series of cerebral mechanisms or reasoned conclusions based on its individual experience, in proportion as it has a large [[telencephalon|cerebrum]] and has got rid of or has acquired the power of controlling its inherited instincts. Man, compared with other animals, has the fewest inherited mental mechanisms or instincts and at the same time the largest cerebrum in proportion to the size of his body. He builds up, from birth onwards, his own mental mechanisms, and forms more of them, that is to say, is more educable, and takes longer in doing so, that is to say, in growing up and maturing his experience, than any other animal. The later stages of evolution leading from his ape-like ancestors to man have consisted definitely in the acquisition of a larger and therefore more educable brain by man and in the consequent education of that brain. A new and most important feature in organic development makes its appearance when we set out the facts of man's evolutionary history. It amounts to a new and unprecedented factor in organic development, external to the organism and yet produced by the activity of the organism upon which it permanently reacts. This factor is the ''record of the past'', which grows and develops by laws other than those affecting the perishable bodies of successive generations of mankind, and exerts an incomparable influence upon the educable brain, so that man, by the interaction of the ''record'' and his educability, is removed to a large extent from the status of the organic world and placed in a new and unique position, subject to new laws and new methods of development unlike those by which the rest of the living world is governed. That which we term the ''record of the past'' comprises the taboos.
 
  
 +
Taxonomy also saw major developments in the twentieth century, with the ascendancy of new schools of thought on the classification of organisms, including cladistics and phenetics. In 1947, the Society of Systematic Zoology was formed, and in 1952, the society published its journal ''Systematic Zoology'' (Hull 1988). G.G. Simpson published ''Principles of Animal Taxonomy'' in 1961, and Ernst Mayr published ''Principles of Systematic Zoology'' in 1969.
  
 
==Notable zoologists==
 
==Notable zoologists==
* [[Louis Agassiz]] ([[malacology]], [[ichthyology]])
+
* [[Louis Agassiz]] (malacology, [[ichthyology]])
 
* [[Aristotle]]
 
* [[Aristotle]]
* [[Bonnaterre, Pierre-Joseph]]
 
* [[Archie Carr]], ([[June 16]], [[1909]]-[[May 21]], [[1987]]) ([[Herpetology]]), esp. sea turtles
 
 
* [[Charles Darwin]]
 
* [[Charles Darwin]]
 
* [[Richard Dawkins]] ([[ethology]])
 
* [[Richard Dawkins]] ([[ethology]])
* [[Dian Fossey]] ([[primatology]])
+
* [[Diane Fossey]] ([[primatology]])
* [[Arthur David Hasler]], ([[January 5]], [[1908]]-[[March 23]], [[2001]]) ([[limnology]], [[ichthyology]], salmon homing)
+
* William Kirby (father of [[entomology]])
* [[Victor Hensen]], ([[February 10]], [[1835]]-[[April 5]], [[1924]]) ([[planktology]])
 
* [[Libbie Hyman]] ([[invertebrate zoology]])
 
* [[William Kirby]] (father of [[entomology]])
 
 
* [[Carolus Linnaeus]] (father of [[systematics]])
 
* [[Carolus Linnaeus]] (father of [[systematics]])
* [[Konrad Lorenz]] ([[ethology]])
+
* [[Konrad Lorenz]] (ethology)
* [[David W. Macdonald]] ([[mammal|wild mammals]])
+
* [[Ernst Mayr]] (1905-2005) (influential [[evolutionary biology|evolutionary biologist]], one of the founders of the "modern synthesis" of evolutionary theory in the 1940s.)
* [[Ernst Mayr]] (1905-2005), influential [[evolutionary biology|evolutionary biologist]], one of the founders of the "modern synthesis" of evolutionary theory in the 1940s.
+
* Desmond Morris (ethology)
* [[Desmond Morris]] ([[ethology]])
+
* [[Edward Osborne Wilson|E.O. Wilson]]([[entomology]], founder of [[sociobiology]])
* [[Ron Nowak]] ([[mammal|wild mammals]])
 
* [[Roger Tory Peterson]] ([[ornithology]])
 
* [[Thomas Say]] ([[entomology]])
 
* [[Ernest P. Walker]] ([[mammal|wild mammals]])
 
* [[Edward Osborne Wilson|E. O Wilson]], b. [[1929]], ([[entomology]], founder of [[sociobiology]])
 
* [[Jakob van Uexküll]] (animal behavior, [[invertebrate zoology]])
 
 
 
 
 
{{Biology-footer}}
 
  
 +
==References==
 +
*Hull, D. L. 1990. ''Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science.'' Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Paperback edition. ISBN 0226360512
 +
*Smith, R. L. 1996. ''Ecology and Field Biology'' Addison Wesley Publishing Company (1996) Paperback. ASIN: B000OF9RZ0
  
{{credit3|Zoology|34813866|History_of_zoology_(before_Darwin)|35113885|History_of_zoology,_post-Darwin|33838006}}
+
{{credit4|Zoology|34813866|History_of_zoology_(before_Darwin)|35113885|History_of_zoology,_post-Darwin|33838006|History_of_biology|33320394}}
  
[[Category:Life sciences]]
+
[[Category:Life sciences]][[Category:Animals]]

Latest revision as of 02:43, 4 April 2008


Zoology is the scientific study of animals. A branch of biology, zoology includes the study of structure and physiology of animals from the molecular level to the whole organism, the development and life cycle of individual animals, classification, animal behavior, population and distribution studies, and the interactions between animals and their biotic (living) and abiotic (nonliving) environments.

The term zoology is most commonly pronounced with the first syllable as "zō," rhyming with "row." Another popular, but less common pronunciation is with the first syllable rhyming with "zoo," as in "two." Zoo is short for "zoological garden". The term comes from the Greek "ζώον" or zoon meaning "animal" and "λόγος" or logos which translates as "word," or "speech," with a literal meaning of "that which refers to."

Humans are classified as animals, as species Homo sapiens; however, humans are unique, and define themselves in not just biological or zoological terms, but also in psychological, moral, spiritual, and social terms. Thus, the study of humans goes well beyond the discipline of zoology.

Branches of zoology

As the science that studies a major group of living and once-living organisms, zoology, like botany, the study of plants, is a very diverse field. The study of animals includes numerous sub-disciplines, including the following:

  1. The structure and physiology of animals is studied under such fields as anatomy, embryology, pathology, animal nutriology, and physiology;
  2. The common genetic and developmental mechanisms of animals (and plants) is studied in molecular biology, molecular genetics, cellular biology, biochemistry, and developmental biology;
  3. The ecology and interactions of animals is covered under behavioral ecology, physiological ecology, insect ecology, biodiversity, conservation, parasitology, marine biology, and other fields, including ecology in general;
  4. The evolution and history of animals is considered in evolutionary studies and paleontology;
  5. The distribution of animals is studied in zoogeography;
  6. Animal behavior is considered in ethology, animal behavior, and reproductive biology;
  7. The classification, naming, and describing of animals is part of systematics and taxonomy.

In addition, the various taxonomically oriented disciplines, such as mammalogy (the study of mammals), primatology (primates), herpetology (reptiles and amphibians), ornithology (birds), icthyology (fish), and so forth, study aspects that are specific to those groups.

Zoology is such a diverse discipline that there is not any professional society that covers all branches of zoology in a dominant manner. Rather, one finds societies according to the various taxons, such as birds, mammals, fish, snakes, wildlife, and so forth.

Zoology serves a common and useful undergraduate major for many medical students because it provides a valuable foundation for understanding human physiology, anatomy, genetics, embryology, and pathology.

Systems of classification

Main articles: Taxonomy and Animal

As the science of describing, naming, and classifying living and extinct organisms, taxonomy is integral to the discipline of zoology. The study of animals requires that zoologists are clear on the name, description, and classification of their subjects. In order to standardize such matters, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) was created. The ICZN is a set of rules in zoology to provide the maximum universality and continuity in classifying animals according to taxonomic judgment.

Animals are one of the major groups of organisms, and are classified as the Kingdom Animalia, or Metazoa. Within this kingdom, a major division is between invertebrates and vertebrates. Invertebrates share the common lack of a trait: a vertebral column, or backbone. About 97 percent of all animal species are invertebrates. Vertebrates are animals with a backbone. With invertebrates, there are more than a dozen phyla, including Porifera (sponges), Cnidaria or Coelenterata (jellyfish, corals), Ctenophora (comb jellies), Mollusca (clams, snails, otopuses, etc.), and Arthropoda (arthropods). Vertebrates, which are a subphylum of the phylum Chordata, include such familiar animals as fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. For a more comprehensive discussion, see the article on animals.

Morphography includes the systematic exploration and tabulation of the facts involved in the recognition of all the recent and extinct kinds of animals and their distribution in space and time. The museum-makers of olden times and their modern representatives, the curators and describers of zoological collections; the early explorers and the modern naturalists and writers on zoogeography; and the collectors of fossils and present-day paleontologists are the chief varieties of zoological workers coming under this heading. Gradually, since the time of John Hunter and Georges Cuvier, anatomical study has associated itself with the more superficial morphography until today no one considers a study of animal form of much value if it does not include internal structure, histology, and embryology in its scope.

General scheme of animal categorization, from the Cyclopaedia, 1728.

History of zoology

Zoology in ancient times

Humans have been fascinated by the animal kingdom throughout history. From the very beginning, people must have had knowledge about animals that made them capable in hunting, knowing which animals were dangerous, and in domesticating animals.

In ancient India, texts described some aspects of bird life, and in Egypt, the metamorphosis of insects and frogs was described. Egyptians and Babylonians also knew of anatomy and physiology in various forms. In ancient Mesopotamia, animals were sometimes kept in what can be described as the first zoological gardens.

In the Greco-Roman world, scholars became more interested in rationalist methods. Greek scientist and philosopher Aristotle, during the 300s B.C.E., described many animals and their behaviors, and devoted considerable attention to categorizing them. In ancient Rome, Pliny the Elder is known for his knowledge of nature. Later, Claudius Galen became a pioneer in medicine and anatomy.

In early Europe, stories of strange animals from distant lands or deep seas were not uncommon, and were recorded in such works as Physiologus, and the works of Albertus Magnus On Animals, among others. These accounts were often apocryphal and creatures were often described as "legendary." This period was succeeded by the age of collectors and travelers, when many of the stories were actually demonstrated as true when the living or preserved specimens were brought to Europe.

The rise of the naturalist

Over time, verification by collecting of things, instead of the accumulation of anecdotes, became more common, and scholars developed the faculty of careful observation. The early collectors of natural curiosities might be considered the founders of the scientific discipline of zoology, and to this day naturalists, museum curators, and systematists, play an important part in the progress of zoology. Indeed, the historical importance of this aspect of zoology was previously so great that, until the beginning of the twentieth century, the name zoology had been associated entirely with it, to the exclusion of the study of anatomical structure or anatomy and function or physiology.

Unlike botanists, who possessed living specimens, early zoologists had museums, and were handicapped in the means of anatomical and physiological study. This was later ameliorated by the method of preserving animal bodies in alcohol, when the demands of medicine for a knowledge of the structure of the human animal brought into existence a separate and special study of human anatomy and physiology.

Scientists who studied the structure of the human body were able to compare human anatomical structures with those of other animals. Comparative anatomy came into existence as a branch of inquiry apart from zoology. It was only in the latter part of the nineteenth century that the limitation of the word zoology to a knowledge of animals that expressly excludes the consideration of their internal structure was rejected by scientists.

The medieval period from the fifth century to early sixteenth century has often been called the dark age of biology. However, some people who dealt with medical issues were showing their interest in animals as well. In the Arab world, science about nature was kept. Many of the Greek works were translated and the knowledge of Aristotle was utilized. Of the Arab biologists, al-Jahiz, who died about 868, is particularly noteworthy. He wrote Kitab al Hayawan (Book of animals). In the 1200s, the German scholar named Albertus Magnus wrote De vegetabilibus (seven books) and De animalibus (26 books). He discussed in some detail the reproduction of animals.

During the Renaissance, roughly from mid-1300s C.E. to early 1600s C.E., naturalists described and classified many animals, and artists such as Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci contributed accurate drawings of animals. Many visual artists were interested in the bodies of animals and humans and studied the physiology in detail. Such comparisons as that between a horse leg and a human leg were made. Books about animals included those by Conrad Gesner, illustrated by, among others, Albrecht Dürer. Inaccurate knowledge was still commonplace, and in many cases old legends of the Greeks were preserved.

Scientific zoology advanced in the sixteenth century with the awakening of the new spirit of observation and exploration; however, for a long time it ran a separate course uninfluenced by the progress of the medical studies of anatomy and physiology. The active search for knowledge by means of observation and experiment found its natural home in the universities. Owing to the connection of medicine with these seats of learning, it was natural that the study of the structure and functions of the human body, and of the animals nearest to humans, should take root there. The spirit of inquiry, which now for the first time became general, showed itself in the anatomical schools of the Italian universities of the sixteenth century, and spread fifty years later to the University of Oxford.

The growth of modern zoology

In the seventeenth century, adherents of the new philosophy of investigation of nature by means of observation and experiment banded themselves into academies or societies for mutual support and dialogue. The first founded of surviving European academies, the Academia Naturae Curiosorum (1651), especially confined itself to the description and illustration of the structure of plants and animals. Eleven years later (1662), the Royal Society of London was incorporated by royal charter, having existed without a name or fixed organization for seventeen years previously (from 1645).

Later, the Academy of Sciences of Paris was established by Louis XIV. These great academies of the seventeenth century affected the progress of zoology by bringing together the museum curators and the physicians or anatomists. While collectors and systematists gained prominence in the latter part of the eighteenth century, notably in Linnaeus, a new type of scientist appeared in such men as John Hunter and other anatomists, who, not satisfied with the superficial observations of the popular zoologists, set themselves to work to examine anatomically the whole animal kingdom, and to classify its members by aid of such study.

In the middle and late 1600s, the pioneering use of the microscope led to insights on physiology, such as observations on blood by Marcello Malphighi, and on minute organisms by Robert Hooke, who published Micrographia in 1665, based on his observations using a compound microscope. Hooke described the compartments of cork tissue as "cells." Anton van Leeuwenhoek (1632–1723), who made more than 400 microscopes himself, was the first person to view single-celled microbes.

Systematizing and classifying dominated biology throughout much of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

Carolus Linnaeus (1707–1778), a Swedish botanist, developed a classification for animals based on shared characteristics. His new system greatly standardized the rules for grouping and naming animals and plants.

At this time, the long-held idea that living organisms could originate from nonliving matter (spontaneous generation) began to crumble, particularly through the work of Louis Pasteur (1822–1895).

It was not until the nineteenth century that the microscope, applied earlier by Leeuwenhoek, Malpighi, Hooke, and Swammerdam to the study of animal structure, was greatly improved as an instrument. The perfecting of the microscope led to a greater comprehension of the doctrine of cell structure and the establishment of the facts that (1) all organisms are either single corpuscles ("cells") of living material (microscopic "animalcules," etc.), or are built up of an immense number of such units; and (2) that all organisms begin their individual existence as a single unit or corpuscle of living substance, which multiplies by binary fission, the products growing in size and multiplying similarly by binary fission.

In the later part of the nineteenth century, the area of genetics developed, when the Austrian monk Gregor Mendel formulated his laws of inheritance, published in 1866. However, the significance his work was not recognized until a few decades afterward.

During this time, other sciences were impacting zoology. The astronomical theories of development of the solar system from a gaseous condition to its present form, put forward by Kant and by Laplace, had impressed minds with the conception of a general movement of spontaneous progress or development in all nature. The science of geology came into existence, and the whole panorama of successive stages of the Earth’s history, each with its distinct population of unknown animals and plants, unlike those of the present day and simpler in proportion as they recede into the past, was revealed by Georges Cuvier, Louis Agassiz, and others. The history of the crust of the earth was explained by Charles Lyell as due to a process of slow development, and not from any cataclysmic agencies or mysterious forces differing from those operating in the present day. Thus, Lyell carried on the narrative of orderly development from the point at which it was left by Kant and Laplace—explaining by reference to the ascertained laws of physics and chemistry, the configuration of the Earth, its mountains and seas, its igneous and its stratified rocks, just as the astronomers had explained by those same laws the evolution of the Sun and planets from diffused gaseous matter of high temperature. The suggestion that living things must also be included in this great development became more apparent.

Zoology and Darwin

In 1859, Charles Darwin, with his publication of The Origin of Species, placed the theory of organic evolution on a new footing, by his marshalling of evidence for evolution by descent with modification, and by presentation of a process by which it could occur, the theory of natural selection. Darwin's theories revolutionized the zoological and botanical sciences.

Darwin's work intersected with the breeding of animals and plants, their congenital variations, and the transmission and perpetuation of those variations. Outside the scientific world, an immense mass of observation and experiment had grown up in relation to this subject. From the earliest times the shepherd, the farmer, the horticulturist, and the fancier had for practical purposes made themselves acquainted with a number of biological laws, and successfully applied them without exciting more than an occasional notice from the academic students of biology. Darwin made use of these observations and formulated their results to a large extent as the laws of variation and heredity. As the breeder selects a congenital variation which suits his requirements, and by breeding from the animals (or plants) exhibiting that variation obtains a new breed characterized by that variation, so Darwin proposed that in nature there is a selection among the congenital variations of each generation of a species.

Natural selection depends on the fact that more young are born than will survive to reproduce, yielding a struggle for existence and a survival of the fittest. In the process, selection either maintains accurately the form of the species from generation to generation or leads to its modification in correspondence with changes in the surrounding circumstances that have relation to its fitness for success in the struggle for life. According to the theory of natural selection, structures either are present because they are selected as useful or because they are inherited from ancestors to whom they were useful, though no longer useful to the existing representatives of those ancestors.

Darwin's theory gave a new basis to the study of organic structure, and directed the classifications of the systematist toward construction of the genealogical tree or pedigree of plants and animals. Darwin's theory also countered a conception of life as an entity above and beyond the common properties of matter, leading to the movement toward the materialistic view that the marvelous and exceptional qualities of living matter are nothing more nor less than an exceptionally complicated development of those chemical and physical properties under guidance of non-progressive, purposeless evolution.

Twentieth Century

Gregor Mendel's experiments hybridizing certain cultivated varieties of plants were presented in 1865 and published in 1866, but failed to attract notice until thirty-five years later in the early twentieth century, sixteen years after his death. Mendel's object was to gain a better understanding of the principles of heredity. Mendel made his chief experiments with cultivated varieties of the self-fertilizing edible pea. When the importance of Mendel's work was realized, it led to the merging of Darwinian theories with an understanding of heredity, resulting in the "modern evolutionary synthesis" or neo-Darwinism. The modern synthesis was integral to the development of much of zoology in the twentieth century.

Among the exciting twentieth-century breakthroughs in genetics and molecular biology was the recognition of DNA as the means to pass on hereditary traits. By 1953, James Watson and Francis Crick clarified the basic structure of DNA, the genetic material for expressing life in all of its forms.

After the success of the discovery of the structure of DNA, Crick turned to the problem of consciousness; in the meantime, the studies of developmental biology came to the forefront. More recently, clones of both plants and animals have been attempted, with some success, but with attendant ethical questions.

The twentieth century also saw the development of the new sciences of animal ecology and animal behavior.

The beginnings of animal ecology can be traced to the early twentieth century, with the work of R. Hesse of Germany and Charles Elton of England (Smith 1996). In the United States, Charles Adams and Victor Shelford were pioneering animal ecologists, with Adams publishing the first textbook on animal ecology, and Shelford emphasizing plant-animal interactions.

Although the formal study of animal behavior began in the nineteenth century with George J. Romanes, in the twentieth century it grew prominent, developing along four major lines: behaviorism, the study of behavior mechanism; ethology, the study of the function and evolution of behavior; behavioral ecology, the investigation of how animals interact with their biotic and abiotic environment, with emphasis on the influence of natural selection; and sociobiology, a controversial discipline, pioneered by Edward Osborne Wilson, that applied the principles of evolutionary biology to animal social behavior, and ultimately to humans (Smith 1996).

Taxonomy also saw major developments in the twentieth century, with the ascendancy of new schools of thought on the classification of organisms, including cladistics and phenetics. In 1947, the Society of Systematic Zoology was formed, and in 1952, the society published its journal Systematic Zoology (Hull 1988). G.G. Simpson published Principles of Animal Taxonomy in 1961, and Ernst Mayr published Principles of Systematic Zoology in 1969.

Notable zoologists

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Hull, D. L. 1990. Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Paperback edition. ISBN 0226360512
  • Smith, R. L. 1996. Ecology and Field Biology Addison Wesley Publishing Company (1996) Paperback. ASIN: B000OF9RZ0

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.