CONTENT - International Society of Zoological Sciences

S24 ICZ2008 - Abstracts
It can be attributed to a demiurgic Ềtre Supreme, like Lamarck, son
of the Revolution did, but this is not necessary for explaining
animal progress .
1) Chaisson, E. 2001, Closmic Evolution. The Rise of Complexity
in Nature. Harvard University Press
2) Keidon, A. and Lorenz, R.D. 2005. Non-equilibrium
Thermodynamics and the Production of Rntropy. Life,Earth and
Beyond. Springer Verlag
3) Lotka, A.J,1922.Contribution to the Energetics of
Evolution.PNAS 8 p.147
4) Verm eij, G. 2004. Nature: An Economic History. Princeton
University Press
D’Omalius d’Halloy, Lamarck’s nice student
Marie-Claire Groessens-Van Dyck
Morren Foundation, Catholic University of Louvain-la-Neuve,
Belgium
The well-known Belgian geologist J.J. d’Omalius d’Halloy has been
an assiduous Lamarck’s student before to become an assiduous
defender of the Lamarck’s idea of the transformation of species. In
1848, he stood up particularly for this point of view in a lecture to
the Belgian Academy of Sciences. In this lecture, he pointed up a
phenomenon just observed by his famous colleague from
university of Louvain, the zoologist P.J. Van Beneeden. He saw in
it what will be call later a case of neoteny and immediately pointed
out this phenomenon as a mechanism able to transform species.
On his side, P.J. Van Beneden claimed with reason the
misinterpretation of his observation. This paper shows how the
geologist has very well interpreted the consequences of a
phenomena he has understood in an absolutely wrong way !
Baldwin Effect and Phenotypic Plasticity.
Pierre Jolivet
67 Boulevard Soult, F-75012-Paris, France
Introduction : Genes and environment are essentially linked in the
production of the phenotype. Baldwin effect is supposed to be
produced when a biological trait becomes innate as a result of first
being learned. If a mutation increases fitness, it will tend to
proliferate in the population. Baldwinian evolution should be able
to reinforce or weaken a genetic trait.
Methods: Lamarckian evolution can arise from purely Darwinian
evolution. Our concept arose mostly from the observation of ant
domatia in plants and of controversial phenomena as heredity of
callosities and coaptations among animals.
Discussion: In 1896, James Mark Baldwin proposed a theory,
entitled « a new factor of evolution », which has been called later
on the Baldwin Effect. It is, roughly speaking, the genetic
assimilation of an acquired character, physical or mental ; it is the
result of an interaction of evolution with learning by individuals over
their lifetime. Baldwin is remembered today exclusively for this
paper. Recently, Erika Crispo (2007) and Mary Jeanne Eberhard
(2003) pointed out that the two related evolutionary theories
pertaining to phenotypic plasticity, those of James Mark Baldwin
and of Conrad Hal Waddington, differ. Both theories have been
often confused, and the purpose here is to stick to Baldwin Effect,
which despite the ideas expressed by Baldwin himself, is a sort of
an effort to reconcile the, otherwise irreconciliable, lamarckism and
darwinism. In effect, phenotypic plasticity could allow an individual
to genetically absorb a partially successful somatic change,
through mutations, which might otherwise be useless to the
individual. The Baldwin Effect says that a biological trait becomes
innate as a result of first being learned. In fact, it is a sequential
process in which acquired characters, somations, become genetic
characters. The learned response to an environment change
evolves on a genetic basis. The effect has been always
controversial, but there are instances, which cannot be explained
except by turning to the Baldwin Effect. Besides several
simulations on software seem to have successfully confirmed the
correctness of the theories.
- 98 -
Conclusions : 112 years of interest in the Baldwin effect produced
thousand of papers. Roughly speaking, it means a selection of
genes which reinforces the genetic basis of a variant of a
phenotype. Modern authors concentrate on the phenotype, not the
genotype, as the central driving force of the evolution. Lamarck
was not fully wrong after all.
Plant/animal frontier (1780-1830)
Denis Lamy
Muséum national d’histoire naturelle, Département Systématique &
Evolution, UMS CNRS 2700, Taxonomie et Collections, CP 39, 57
rue Cuvier, F-75231 Paris Cedex 05, France
The distribution of the beings following a scale or a line from the
minerals to the plants then to the animals was currently accepted
by the naturalists of the 18 th century. Lithophytes and zoophytes
were considered as the intermediate between minerals and plants,
plants and animals respectively. By the way the frontiers between
the kingdoms were not well defined. By the end of the 18 th century,
the development of the study of the more simple animals and
plants led to the distinction between animals and plants. Rejecting
the concept of zoophytes, J.B. Lamarck proposed two independent
series; but he compared the organization and the development of
the more imperfect organisms in the animal and plant kingdoms.
J.J. Virey accepted a common origin, more or less aquatic
organisms, to the two kingdoms, developing in two diametrically
opposite lines. A few years after, in front of the difficulty to place
microscopic organisms, Bory de Saint Vincent proposed a new
regnum, named ‘Psychodiaires’, including the ‘ébauches’ of plants,
animals and minerals. These propositions will be discussed,
namely in terms of their impact on the elaboration of animal and
plant classifications.
Lamarck and the beginning of life
Stéphane Tirard
Centre François Viète, Université de Nantes, France
In 1802, in his book, Recherches sur l’organisation des corps
vivans… Lamarck presented, for the first time, his evolutionary
theory, in which animal series begin with spontaneous generation.
We want to study, in Lamarck’s works, the distinction between
spontaneous generations and the notion of primordial beginning.
Firstly, we will show that spontaneous generations are completely
included in the general process of evolution and constitute a
simple, but complete, model of the lamarckian mechanisms of the
transformations of organisms.
Secondly, it seems very important to study the analogy established
by Lamarck between spontaneous generation and fecundation.
Thirdly, we will examine how, in Lamarck’s works, the notion of
perpetual beginning dominates primordial beginning.