The Chicago school of ecology's evolutionary superorganism and the clements-wright connection.

IF 1.6 3区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Philippe Huneman
{"title":"The Chicago school of ecology's evolutionary superorganism and the clements-wright connection.","authors":"Philippe Huneman","doi":"10.1007/s40656-024-00652-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>\"Organicism\" often refers to the idea that ecosystems or communities are, or are like, organisms. Often implicit in early twentieth century, it has been theorized by Clements, relying on physiological and developmental concepts. I investigate the fate of this idea in major attempts of a theoretical synthesis of ecology in the first part of the twentieth century. I first consider Bioecology (1939), by Clements and Shelford, which elaborates clementsian organicism as a general framework for plant and animal ecology. Then I investigate the major animal ecology treatise of the Chicago school ecologists C. Allee, T. Park, O. Park, K. Schmidt and A. Emerson, Principles of animal ecology (1949). I show how they shifted organicism from physiology to evolution, synthesizing inspiration from both Clements and Sewall Wright, got their inspiration in evolutionary biology, and built a systematic correspondence between cells, organisms and communities. I claim that the focus on populations allowed them to apply Darwinian insights at the level of communities. Finally I argue that this theoretical synthesis fell apart in the next decade because of the rise of density-dependent accounts of population regulation.</p>","PeriodicalId":56308,"journal":{"name":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","volume":"47 1","pages":"12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11835916/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-024-00652-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

"Organicism" often refers to the idea that ecosystems or communities are, or are like, organisms. Often implicit in early twentieth century, it has been theorized by Clements, relying on physiological and developmental concepts. I investigate the fate of this idea in major attempts of a theoretical synthesis of ecology in the first part of the twentieth century. I first consider Bioecology (1939), by Clements and Shelford, which elaborates clementsian organicism as a general framework for plant and animal ecology. Then I investigate the major animal ecology treatise of the Chicago school ecologists C. Allee, T. Park, O. Park, K. Schmidt and A. Emerson, Principles of animal ecology (1949). I show how they shifted organicism from physiology to evolution, synthesizing inspiration from both Clements and Sewall Wright, got their inspiration in evolutionary biology, and built a systematic correspondence between cells, organisms and communities. I claim that the focus on populations allowed them to apply Darwinian insights at the level of communities. Finally I argue that this theoretical synthesis fell apart in the next decade because of the rise of density-dependent accounts of population regulation.

芝加哥生态学学派的进化超级有机体和克莱门茨-赖特的联系。
“有机体论”通常指的是生态系统或群落是或类似于有机体的观点。在20世纪初,它通常是隐含的,后来克莱门茨根据生理和发育概念将其理论化。我在二十世纪上半叶生态学理论综合的主要尝试中考察了这一思想的命运。我首先考虑了克莱门茨和谢尔福德的《生物生态学》(1939),该书将克莱门茨有机体论阐述为植物和动物生态学的总体框架。然后,我研究了芝加哥学派生态学家C. Allee、T. Park、O. Park、K. Schmidt和A. Emerson的主要动物生态学论文《动物生态学原理》(1949)。我展示了他们如何将有机体论从生理学转向进化,综合克莱门茨和休厄尔·赖特的灵感,从进化生物学中获得灵感,并在细胞、有机体和群落之间建立了系统的对应关系。我认为,对人口的关注使他们能够将达尔文的见解应用于社区层面。最后,我认为,由于人口调控的密度依赖理论的兴起,这种理论综合在接下来的十年中瓦解了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences is an interdisciplinary journal committed to providing an integrative approach to understanding the life sciences. It welcomes submissions from historians, philosophers, biologists, physicians, ethicists and scholars in the social studies of science. Contributors are expected to offer broad and interdisciplinary perspectives on the development of biology, biomedicine and related fields, especially as these perspectives illuminate the foundations, development, and/or implications of scientific practices and related developments. Submissions which are collaborative and feature different disciplinary approaches are especially encouraged, as are submissions written by senior and junior scholars (including graduate students).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信