Difference between morphollaxis and epimorphosis

  • Thread starter Thread starter gracy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Difference
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the differences between morphollaxis and epimorphosis as strategies for regeneration in organisms. Morphollaxis, observed in primitive single-celled and colonial animals, allows for complete body regeneration due to minimal tissue differentiation. In contrast, epimorphosis, seen in more complex organisms like salamanders, permits limited regeneration, as these creatures cannot revert to a fertilized egg state. Both strategies serve as survival mechanisms, enabling organisms to recover from injuries, such as losing a tail to a predator, and return to a state of homeostasis. The conversation also touches on the historical context of biological classification, suggesting that the naming of phenomena often oversimplifies understanding and can lead to complacency in scientific inquiry.
gracy
Messages
2,486
Reaction score
83
In difference between column the second point says one talks about similarity and the other of size.I think there should be term"smaller "or "similar" (point is both should mention the same thing)
please guide
 

Attachments

  • upload_2015-9-5_1-23-0.png
    upload_2015-9-5_1-23-0.png
    99.8 KB · Views: 646
Biology news on Phys.org
gracy said:
both should mention the same thing

Says who ? The author does his/her best to arrange the issues, but apparently for you is more successful in the first and the last.
 
Morphollaxis: Very "primitive" single-celled and colonial animals do not have a lot of tissue differentiation - or none at all - no tissues. Beasties in this category can rebuild the whole 'body' because the position effect required for stem cells does not need to be extant.

Epimorphosis: found in more complex beasties like salamanders. They cannot rebuild the whole body with all of the tissues because that would require "reverting to a fertilized egg" (not real, never happens, just a phrase to help get the concept), so they are stuck perform much more limited repairs.

Both of these responses are a survival strategy. Lose a tail to a predator? okay, no big deal I can grow a new one. Better than the predator eating all of me. Same concept applies in both cases. It can be viewed as a return to homeostasis. That is the "place" where living things do best.

BTW: this stuff was old when I was young, which makes it really old. That is not inherently bad, it is just that 19th century biologists were driven to name things so they could put whatever they found into a cubby hole. Then say, 'See we know what this is all about because it has a name'. People have done this forever - if you can apply a name to something - classify it - then you are off the hook for really understanding the phenomenon. Or even thinking about it maybe.

You seem to have knack for digging this stuff up. A freshly minted PhD would probably wonder where all these oddball terms came from unless they took a History of Science class in their field. It was a required class for me 50+ years ago.
 
  • Like
Likes gracy
As child, before I got my first X-ray, I used to fantasize that I might have a mirror image anatomy - my heart on the right, my appendix on the right. Why not? (Caveat: I'm not talking about sci-fi molecular-level mirroring. We're not talking starvation because I couldn't process certain proteins, etc.) I'm simpy tlakng about, when a normal zygote divides, it technically has two options which way to form. Oen would expcet a 50:50 split. But we all have our heart on the left and our...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 53 ·
2
Replies
53
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
27K