Dual Causality and the Autonomy of Biology.

Ernst Mayr's concept of dual causality in biology with the two forms of causes (proximate and ultimate) continues to provide an essential foundation for the philosophy of biology. They are equivalent to functional (=proximate) and evolutionary (=ultimate) causes with both required for full biological explanations. The natural sciences can be classified into nomological, historical nomological and historical dual causality, the last including only biology. Because evolutionary causality is unique to biology and must be included for all complete biological explanations, biology is autonomous from the physical sciences.

Conflict resolution of grammar and gender for avian species-group names under Article 31.2.2 of the ICZN Code: is gender agreement worth it?

We analyze recent nomenclatural treatment of selected avian species-group names that may be either adjective and variable or noun and invariable. In 27 such names, we found that 14 previously identified as adjectives are nouns under Article 31.2.2 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Five of them may require correction in current checklists; they are bresilius in Ramphocelus bresilius (Linnaeus, 1766) to bresilia, germana in Amblyornis macgregoriae germana Rothschild, 1910 to germanus, argentinus in Muscisaxicola cinereus argentinus Hellmayr, 1932 to argentina, martinicus in Porphyrio martinicus (Linnaeus, 1766) to martinica, and moluccus in Threskiornis moluccus (Cuvier, 1829) to molucca. Mindful of the compounding effect of species-genus recombination from taxonomic revision, we reach the conclusion, not new, that the requirement for gender agreement in species-group names is the single biggest cause of nomenclatural instability in zoology. To resolve it, we support replacing gender agreement by original spellings for species-group names.

Multiple explanations in Darwinian evolutionary theory.

Variational evolutionary theory as advocated by Darwin is not a single theory, but a bundle of related but independent theories, namely: (a) variational evolution; (b) gradualism rather than large leaps; (c) processes of phyletic evolution and of speciation; (d) causes for the formation of varying individuals in populations and for the action of selective agents; and (e) all organisms evolved from a common ancestor. The first four are nomological-deductive explanations and the fifth is historical-narrative. Therefore evolutionary theory must be divided into nomological and historical theories which are both testable against objective empirical observations. To be scientific, historical evolutionary theories must be based on well corroborated nomological theories, both evolutionary and functional. Nomological and general historical evolutionary theories are well tested and must be considered as strongly corroborated scientific theories. Opponents of evolutionary theory are concerned only with historical evolutionary theories, having little interest in nomological theory. Yet given a well corroborated nomological evolutionary theory, historical evolutionary theories follow automatically. If understood correctly, both forms of evolutionary theories stand on their own as corroborated scientific theories and should not be labeled as facts.

Ecological aspects of the evolutionary processes.

Darwin in his On the Origin of species made it clear that evolutionary change depends on the combined action of two different causes, the first being the origin of genetically based phenotypic variation in the individual organisms comprising the population and the second being the action of selective agents of the external environment placing demands on the individual organisms. For over a century following Darwin, most evolutionists focused on the origin of inherited variation and its transmission; many workers continue to regard genetics to be the core of evolutionary theory. Far less attention has been given to the exact nature of the selective agents with most evolutionists still treating this cause imprecisely to the detriment of our understanding of both nomological and historical evolutionary theory. Darwin was vague in the meaning of his new concept of "Natural Selection," using it interchangeably as one of the causes for evolutionary change and as the final outcome (= evolutionary change). In 1930, natural selection was defined clearly as "non-random, differential reproduction of genes" by R. Fisher and J.B.S. Haldane which is a statement of the outcome of evolutionary process and which omits mention of the causes bringing about this change. Evolutionists quickly accepted this outcome definition of natural selection, and have used interchangeably selection both as a cause and as the result of evolutionary change, causing great confusion. Herein, the details will be discussed of how the external environment (i.e., the environment-phenotype interaction) serves as selective agents and exerts demands on the phenotypic organisms. Included are the concepts of fitness and of the components of fitness (= adaptations) which are respectively (a) survival, (b) direct reproductive and (c) indirect reproductive features. Finally, it will be argued that historical-narrative analyses of organisms, including classification and phylogenetic history, are possible only with a full understanding of nomological evolutionary theory and with functional/adaptive studies of the employed taxonomic features in addition to the standard comparative investigations.

Morphology and evolution of the ectethmoid-mandibular articulation in the meliphagidae (Aves).

The ectethmoid-mandibular articulation in Melithreptus and Manorina (Meliphagidae: Aves) consists of the dorsal mandibular process fitting into and abutting against the ventral ectethmoid fossa; it forms a brace for the mandible. This articulation in Melithreptus is a typical diarthrosis with long folded capsular walls. The mandible, thus, has two separate articulations, each with a different axis of rotation. No other genus of Meliphagidae (except Ptiloprora) or any other avian family possesses a similar feature. The jaw and tongue musculature of Melithreptus are described. The two muscles opening the jaws are well developed, while those closing the jaws are small. The tongue muscles show no special developments. A large maxillary gland, presumably muscus secreting, covers the ventral surface of the jaw muscles. Its duct opens into the oral cavity just behind the tip of the upper jaw. The frilled tip of the tongue rests against the duct opening. The ectethmoid-mandibular articulation braces the adducted mandible against dorsoposteriorly directed forces. The mandible can be held closed without a compression force exerted by the mandible on the quadrate, permitting the bird to raise its upper jaw with greater ease and less loss of force. The tongue can be protruded through the slight gap between the jaws, moving against the duct opening and thus be coated with mucus. Presumably, these birds capture insects with their sticky tongue. Hence, the ectethmoid-mandibular articulation is an adaptation for this feeding method; it evolved independently in three genera of the Meliphagidae. The ectethmoid-mandibular articulation demonstrates that a bone can have two articulations with different axes of rotation, that the two articular halves can separate widely, and that articular cartilages can be flat and remain in contact over a large area. Its function suggests that the basitemporal articulation of the mandible found in many other birds has a similar function. And it demonstrates that in the evolution of the mammalian dentary-squamosal articulation, the new hinge did not have to lie on the same rotational axis as the existing quadrate-articular hinge.