Question 1: What is a practical system for classifying living organisms?
Even in ancient times, there was a need to organize the rapidly accumulating knowledge in the field of zoology and botany, which led to their systematization. Practical classification systems were created in which animals and plants were grouped depending on the benefit or harm they brought to humans.

For example, medicinal plants, garden plants, ornamental plants, poisonous animals, livestock. These classifications united organisms that were completely different in structure and origin. However, due to ease of use, such classifications are still used in popular and applied literary sources.

Question 2. What contribution did C. Linnaeus make to biology?
C. Linnaeus described more than 8 thousand species of plants and 4 thousand species of animals, established a uniform terminology and procedure for describing species. He grouped similar species into genera, genera into orders, and orders into classes. Thus, he based his classification on the principle of hierarchy (subordination) of taxa. The scientist established the use of binary (double) nomenclature in science, when each species is designated by two words: the first word means the genus and is common to all species included in it, the second is the specific name itself. Moreover, the names for all species are given in Latin and in their native language, which makes it possible for all scientists to understand what plant or animal we are talking about. For example, Rozana conana (Rose hip). K. Linnaeus created the most modern system of the organic world for his time, including in it all species of animals and plants known at that time.

Question 3. Why is Linnaeus’ system called artificial?
K. Linnaeus created the most perfect system of the organic world for his time, including in it all species of animals and plants known at that time. Being a great scientist, in many cases he correctly combined species of organisms based on similarity in structure. However, the arbitrariness in the choice of characteristics for classification - in plants the structure of stamens and pistils, in birds - the structure of the beak, in mammals - the structure of teeth - led Linnaeus to a number of mistakes. He was aware of the artificiality of his system and pointed out the need to develop a natural system of nature. Linnaeus wrote: “An artificial system serves only until a natural one is found.” As is now known, the natural system reflects the origin of animals and plants and is based on their kinship and similarity in a set of essential structural features.

Question 4. State the main provisions of Lamarck’s evolutionary theory.
J. B. Lamarck described the main provisions of his theory in the book “Philosophy of Zoology,” published in 1809. He proposed 2 provisions of the doctrine of evolution. The evolutionary process is presented in the form of gradations, i.e. transitions from one stage of development to another. As a result, there is a gradual increase in the level of organization, more perfect forms emerge from less perfect ones. Thus, the first proposition of Lamarck’s theory is called the “gradation rule.”
Lamarck believed that species do not exist in nature, that the elementary unit of evolution is an individual. The variety of forms arose as a result of the influence of the forces of the external world, in response to which organisms develop adaptive characteristics - adaptations. In this case, the influence of the environment is direct and adequate. The scientist believed that every organism has an inherent desire for improvement. Organisms, being influenced by the factors of the world around them, react in a certain way: by exercising or not exercising their organs. As a result, new combinations of characteristics and the characteristics themselves arise, transmitted over a number of generations (i.e., “inheritance of acquired characteristics” occurs). This second provision of Lamarck’s theory is called the “rule of adequacy”

Question 5. What questions were not answered in Lamarck's evolutionary theory?
J. B. Lamarck could not explain the emergence of adaptations caused by “dead” structures. For example, the color of the shell of bird eggs is clearly adaptive in nature, but it is impossible to explain this fact from the standpoint of his theory. Lamarck's theory was based on the idea of ​​fused heredity characteristic of the whole organism and each of its parts. However, the discovery of the substance of heredity - DNA and the genetic code - finally refuted Lamarck's ideas.

Question 6. What is the essence of Cuvier’s correlation principle? Give examples.
J. Cuvier spoke about the correspondence of the structure of various animal organs to each other, which he called the principle of correlation (correlativity).
For example, if an animal has hooves, then its entire organization reflects a herbivorous lifestyle: teeth are adapted to grinding coarse plant food, jaws have a corresponding structure, a multi-chambered stomach, very long intestines, etc. If an animal has a stomach used for digesting meat, then other organs are formed accordingly: sharp teeth, jaws adapted for tearing and capturing prey, claws for holding it, a flexible spine for maneuvering and jumping.

Question 7. What are the differences between transformism and evolutionary theory?
Among philosophers and natural scientists of the 18th-19th centuries. (J. L. Buffin,
E. J. Saint-Hilaire and others) the idea of ​​the variability of organisms, based on the views of some ancient scientists, was widespread. This direction was called transformism. Transformists assumed that organisms react to changes in external conditions by changing their structure, but did not prove the evolutionary transformations of organisms at the same time.

"Give me one bone and I will restore the animal"

Georges Cuvier

Georges Cuvier published a five-volume work on comparative animal anatomy: Lecons d'anatomie comparés (after his death, his students will publish a more detailed work in eight volumes).

One of the scientist’s scientific achievements is demonstration of the fact how closely all the structural and functional features of the body are connected and determine each other:

“Each animal is adapted to the environment in which it lives, finds food, hides from enemies, and takes care of its offspring. If this animal is a herbivore, its front teeth are adapted to pluck grass, and its molars are adapted to grind it. Massive teeth that grind grass require large and powerful jaws and corresponding chewing muscles. Therefore, such an animal must have a heavy, large head, and since it has neither sharp claws nor long fangs to fight off a predator, it fights off with its horns. To support the heavy head and horns, a strong neck and large cervical vertebrae with long processes to which muscles are attached are needed. To digest a large amount of low-nutrient grass, you need a voluminous stomach and a long intestine, and, therefore, you need a large belly, you need wide ribs. This is how the appearance of a herbivorous mammal emerges. “An organism,” said Cuvier, “is a coherent whole. Individual parts of it cannot be changed without causing changes in others. Cuvier called this constant connection of organs with each other “the relationship between the parts of the organism.”

The task of morphology is to reveal the patterns to which the structure of an organism is subject, and the method that allows us to establish the canons and norms of organization is a systematic comparison of the same organ (or the same organ system) across all sections of the animal kingdom. What does this comparison give? It precisely establishes, firstly, the place occupied by a certain organ in the animal’s body, secondly, all the modifications experienced by this organ at various stages of the zoological ladder, and thirdly, the relationship between individual organs, on the one hand, and also by them and the body as a whole - on the other. It was this relationship that Cuvier qualified with the term “organic correlations” and formulated as follows: “Each organism forms a single closed whole, in which not a single part can change without the others also changing.”

“A change in one part of the body,” he says in another of his works, “affects the change in all others.”

You can give any number of examples illustrating the “law of correlation”. And it’s not surprising, says Cuvier: after all, the entire organization of animals rests on him. Take any large predator: the connection between the individual parts of its body is striking in its obviousness. Keen hearing, keen vision, well-developed sense of smell, strong muscles of the limbs, allowing one to jump towards prey, retractable claws, agility and speed in movements, strong jaws, sharp teeth, simple digestive tract, etc. - who does not know these “relatively developed » features of a lion, tiger, leopard or panther. And look at any bird: its entire organization constitutes a “single, closed whole,” and this unity in this case manifests itself as a kind of adaptation to life in the air, to flight. The wing, the muscles that move it, a highly developed ridge on the sternum, cavities in the bones, a peculiar structure of the lungs that form air sacs, a high tone of cardiac activity, a well-developed cerebellum that regulates the complex movements of the bird, etc. Try to change something something in this complex of structural and functional features of the bird: any such change, says Cuvier, inevitably appears to one degree or another, if not on all, then on many other features of the bird.

In parallel with correlations of a morphological nature, there are physiological correlations. The structure of an organ is related to its functions. Morphology is not divorced from physiology. Everywhere in the body, along with the correlation, another pattern is observed. Cuvier qualifies it as a subordination of organs and a subordination of functions.

The subordination of organs is associated with the subordination of the functions developed by these organs. However, both are equally related to the animal’s lifestyle. Everything here should be in some harmonious balance. Once this relative harmony is shaken, the further existence of an animal that has become a victim of a disturbed balance between its organization, functions and conditions of existence will be unthinkable. “During life, the organs are not just united,” writes Cuvier, “but they also influence each other and compete together in the name of a common goal. There is not a single function that does not require the help and participation of almost all other functions and does not feel, to a greater or lesser extent, the degree of their energy […] It is obvious that proper harmony between the mutually acting organs is a necessary condition for the existence of the animal to which they belong, and that if any of these functions are changed out of conformity with the changes in the other functions of the organism, then it cannot exist.”

So, familiarity with the structure and functions of several organs - and often just one organ - allows us to judge not only the structure, but also the way of life of the animal. And vice versa: knowing the conditions of existence of a particular animal, we can imagine its organization. However, Cuvier adds, it is not always possible to judge the organization of an animal on the basis of its lifestyle: how, in fact, can one connect the rumination of an animal with the presence of two hooves or horns?

The extent to which Cuvier was imbued with the consciousness of the constant connectedness of the parts of an animal’s body can be seen from the following anecdote. One of his students wanted to joke with him. He dressed up in the skin of a wild sheep, entered Cuvier’s bedroom at night and, standing near his bed, shouted in a wild voice: “Cuvier, Cuvier, I will eat you!” The great naturalist woke up, stretched out his hand, felt the horns and, examining the hooves in the semi-darkness, calmly answered: “Hooves, horns - a herbivore; You can’t eat me!”

Having created a new field of knowledge - comparative anatomy of animals - Cuvier paved new paths of research in biology. Thus, the triumph of evolutionary teaching was prepared.”

Samin D.K., 100 great scientific discoveries, M., “Veche”, 2008, pp. 334-336.

The purpose of correlation analysis is to identify an estimate of the strength of the connection between random variables (features) that characterize some real process.
Problems of correlation analysis:
a) Measuring the degree of coherence (closeness, strength, severity, intensity) of two or more phenomena.
b) Selection of factors that have the most significant impact on the resulting attribute, based on measuring the degree of connectivity between phenomena. Factors that are significant in this aspect are used further in regression analysis.
c) Detection of unknown causal relationships.

The forms of manifestation of relationships are very diverse. The most common types are functional (complete) and correlation (incomplete) connection.
Correlation manifests itself on average for mass observations, when the given values ​​of the dependent variable correspond to a certain series of probabilistic values ​​of the independent variable. The relationship is called correlation, if each value of the factor characteristic corresponds to a well-defined non-random value of the resultant characteristic.
A visual representation of a correlation table is the correlation field. It is a graph where X values ​​are plotted on the abscissa axis, Y values ​​are plotted on the ordinate axis, and combinations of X and Y are shown by dots. By the location of the dots, one can judge the presence of a connection.
Indicators of connection closeness make it possible to characterize the dependence of the variation of the resulting trait on the variation of the factor trait.
A more advanced indicator of the degree of crowding correlation connection is linear correlation coefficient. When calculating this indicator, not only deviations of individual values ​​of a characteristic from the average are taken into account, but also the very magnitude of these deviations.

The key questions of this topic are the equations of the regression relationship between the effective characteristic and the explanatory variable, the least squares method for estimating the parameters of the regression model, analyzing the quality of the resulting regression equation, constructing confidence intervals for predicting the values ​​of the effective characteristic using the regression equation.

Example 2

System of normal equations.
a n + b∑x = ∑y
a∑x + b∑x 2 = ∑y x
For our data, the system of equations has the form
30a + 5763 b = 21460
5763 a + 1200261 b = 3800360
From the first equation we express A and substitute into the second equation:
We get b = -3.46, a = 1379.33
Regression equation:
y = -3.46 x + 1379.33

2. Calculation of regression equation parameters.
Sample means.



Sample variances:


Standard deviation


1.1. Correlation coefficient
Covariance.

We calculate the indicator of connection closeness. This indicator is the sample linear correlation coefficient, which is calculated by the formula:

The linear correlation coefficient takes values ​​from –1 to +1.
Connections between characteristics can be weak and strong (close). Their criteria are assessed on the Chaddock scale:
0.1 < r xy < 0.3: слабая;
0.3 < r xy < 0.5: умеренная;
0.5 < r xy < 0.7: заметная;
0.7 < r xy < 0.9: высокая;
0.9 < r xy < 1: весьма высокая;
In our example, the relationship between trait Y and factor X is high and inverse.
In addition, the linear pair correlation coefficient can be determined through the regression coefficient b:

1.2. Regression equation(estimation of regression equation).

The linear regression equation is y = -3.46 x + 1379.33

Coefficient b = -3.46 shows the average change in the effective indicator (in units of measurement y) with an increase or decrease in the value of factor x per unit of its measurement. In this example, with an increase of 1 unit, y decreases by -3.46 on average.
The coefficient a = 1379.33 formally shows the predicted level of y, but only if x = 0 is close to the sample values.
But if x=0 is far from the sample values ​​of x, then a literal interpretation may lead to incorrect results, and even if the regression line describes the observed sample values ​​fairly accurately, there is no guarantee that this will also be the case when extrapolating left or right.
By substituting the appropriate x values ​​into the regression equation, we can determine the aligned (predicted) values ​​of the performance indicator y(x) for each observation.
The relationship between y and x determines the sign of the regression coefficient b (if > 0 - direct relationship, otherwise - inverse). In our example, the connection is reverse.
1.3. Elasticity coefficient.
It is not advisable to use regression coefficients (in example b) to directly assess the influence of factors on a resultant characteristic if there is a difference in the units of measurement of the resultant indicator y and the factor characteristic x.
For these purposes, elasticity coefficients and beta coefficients are calculated.
The average elasticity coefficient E shows by what percentage on average the result will change in the aggregate at from its average value when the factor changes x by 1% of its average value.
The elasticity coefficient is found by the formula:


The elasticity coefficient is less than 1. Therefore, if X changes by 1%, Y will change by less than 1%. In other words, the influence of X on Y is not significant.
Beta coefficient shows by what part of the value of its standard deviation the average value of the resulting characteristic will change when the factor characteristic changes by the value of its standard deviation with the value of the remaining independent variables fixed at a constant level:

Those. an increase in x by the standard deviation S x will lead to a decrease in the average value of Y by 0.74 standard deviation S y .
1.4. Approximation error.
Let us evaluate the quality of the regression equation using the error of absolute approximation. Average approximation error - average deviation of calculated values ​​from actual ones:


Since the error is less than 15%, this equation can be used as regression.
Analysis of variance.
The purpose of analysis of variance is to analyze the variance of the dependent variable:
∑(y i - y cp) 2 = ∑(y(x) - y cp) 2 + ∑(y - y(x)) 2
Where
∑(y i - y cp) 2 - total sum of squared deviations;
∑(y(x) - y cp) 2 - the sum of squared deviations due to regression (“explained” or “factorial”);
∑(y - y(x)) 2 - residual sum of squared deviations.
Theoretical correlation relationship for a linear connection is equal to the correlation coefficient r xy .
For any form of dependence, the tightness of the connection is determined using multiple correlation coefficient:

This coefficient is universal, as it reflects the closeness of the connection and the accuracy of the model, and can also be used for any form of connection between variables. When constructing a one-factor correlation model, the multiple correlation coefficient is equal to the pair correlation coefficient r xy.
1.6. Determination coefficient.
The square of the (multiple) correlation coefficient is called the coefficient of determination, which shows the proportion of variation in the resultant attribute explained by the variation in the factor attribute.
Most often, when interpreting the coefficient of determination, it is expressed as a percentage.
R2 = -0.742 = 0.5413
those. in 54.13% of cases, changes in x lead to changes in y. In other words, the accuracy of selecting the regression equation is average. The remaining 45.87% of the change in Y is explained by factors not taken into account in the model.

Bibliography

1. Econometrics: Textbook / Ed. I.I. Eliseeva. – M.: Finance and Statistics, 2001, p. 34..89.
2. Magnus Y.R., Katyshev P.K., Peresetsky A.A. Econometrics. Beginner course. Tutorial. – 2nd ed., rev. – M.: Delo, 1998, p. 17..42.
3. Workshop on econometrics: Proc. allowance / I.I. Eliseeva, S.V. Kurysheva, N.M. Gordeenko and others; Ed. I.I. Eliseeva. – M.: Finance and Statistics, 2001, p. 5..48.

A living organism is a single whole in which all parts and organs are interconnected. When the structure and functions of one organ change in the evolutionary process, this inevitably entails corresponding or, as they say, correlative changes in other organs related to the first physiologically, morphologically, through heredity, etc.

Example: One of the most significant, progressive changes in the evolution of arthropods was the appearance of a powerful external cuticular skeleton. This inevitably affected many other organs - the continuous skin-muscular sac could not function with a hard outer shell and broke up into separate muscle bundles; the secondary body cavity lost its supporting significance and was replaced by a mixed body cavity (mixocoel) of a different origin, which performs mainly a trophic function; body growth became periodic and began to be accompanied by molting, etc. In insects, there is a clear correlation between the respiratory organs and blood vessels. With the strong development of tracheas that deliver oxygen directly to the place of its consumption, blood vessels become redundant and disappear.

M. Milne-Edwards (1851)

Milne-Edwards (1800–1885) - French zoologist, foreign corresponding member of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences (1846), one of the founders of morphophysiological studies of marine fauna. Student and follower of J. Cuvier.

The evolution of organisms is always accompanied by differentiation of parts and organs.

Differentiation consists in the fact that initially homogeneous parts of the body gradually become more and more different from each other both in form and function or are divided into parts of different functions. While specializing to perform a certain function, they at the same time lose the ability to perform other functions and thereby become more dependent on other parts of the body. Consequently, differentiation always leads not only to the complication of the organism, but also to the subordination of parts to the whole - simultaneously with the morphophysiological division of the organism, the reverse process of the formation of a harmonious whole, called integration, occurs.

Question

Haeckel-Müller biogenetic law (also known as “Haeckel’s law”, “Müller-Haeckel law”, “Darwin-Müller-Haeckel law”, “basic biogenetic law”): every living creature in its individual development (ontogenesis) repeats in to a certain extent, the forms traversed by its ancestors or its species (phylogeny). It played an important role in the history of the development of science, but is currently not recognized in its original form by modern biological science. According to the modern interpretation of the biogenetic law, proposed by the Russian biologist A. N. Severtsov at the beginning of the 20th century, in ontogenesis there is a repetition of the characteristics not of adult ancestors, but of their embryos.

In fact, the “biogenetic law” was formulated long before the advent of Darwinism. The German anatomist and embryologist Martin Rathke (1793-1860) in 1825 described gill slits and arches in embryos of mammals and birds - one of the most striking examples of recapitulation. In 1828, Karl Maksimovich Baer, ​​based on Rathke’s data and the results of his own studies of the development of vertebrates, formulated the law of embryonic similarity: “Embryos successively move in their development from general characteristics of the type to more and more special characteristics. The last to develop are signs indicating that the embryo belongs to a certain genus or species, and, finally, development ends with the appearance of the characteristic features of a given individual.” Baer did not attach an evolutionary meaning to this “law” (he never accepted Darwin’s evolutionary teachings until the end of his life), but later this law began to be considered as “embryological evidence of evolution” (see Macroevolution) and evidence of the origin of animals of the same type from a common ancestor.

The “biogenetic law” as a consequence of the evolutionary development of organisms was first formulated (rather vaguely) by the English naturalist Charles Darwin in his book “The Origin of Species” in 1859: “The interest of embryology will increase significantly if we see in the embryo a more or less shadowed image of a common progenitor , in their adult or larval state, all members of the same large class"

2 years before Ernst Haeckel formulated the biogenetic law, a similar formulation was proposed by the German zoologist Fritz Müller, who worked in Brazil, based on his studies of the development of crustaceans. In his book For Darwin (Für Darwin), published in 1864, he italicizes the idea: “the historical development of a species will be reflected in the history of its individual development.”

A brief aphoristic formulation of this law was given by the German naturalist Ernst Haeckel in 1866. The brief formulation of the law is as follows: Ontogenesis is the recapitulation of phylogeny (in many translations - “Ontogenesis is a quick and brief repetition of phylogeny”).

Examples of implementation of the biogenetic law

A striking example of the fulfillment of the biogenetic law is the development of the frog, which includes the tadpole stage, which in its structure is much more similar to fish than to amphibians:

In the tadpole, as in lower fish and fish fry, the basis of the skeleton is the notochord, only later becoming overgrown with cartilaginous vertebrae in the body part. The tadpole's skull is cartilaginous, and well-developed cartilaginous arches adjoin it; gill breathing. The circulatory system is also built according to the fish type: the atrium has not yet divided into the right and left halves, only venous blood enters the heart, and from there it goes through the arterial trunk to the gills. If the development of the tadpole stopped at this stage and did not go further, we should, without any hesitation, classify such an animal as a superclass of fish.

The embryos of not only amphibians, but also all vertebrates without exception, also have gill slits, a two-chambered heart, and other features characteristic of fish in the early stages of development. For example, a bird embryo in the first days of incubation is also a tailed fish-like creature with gill slits. At this stage, the future chick reveals similarities with lower fish, and with amphibian larvae, and with the early stages of development of other vertebrates (including humans). At subsequent stages of development, the bird embryo becomes similar to reptiles:

And while the chicken embryo, by the end of the first week, has both the hind and forelimbs looking like identical legs, while the tail has not yet disappeared, and feathers have not yet formed from the papillae, in all its characteristics it is closer to reptiles than to adult birds.

The human embryo goes through similar stages during embryogenesis. Then, during the period between approximately the fourth and sixth weeks of development, it changes from a fish-like organism to an organism indistinguishable from a monkey embryo, and only then acquires human characteristics.

Haeckel called this repetition of the characteristics of ancestors during the individual development of an individual recapitulation.

Dollo's Law of Irreversibility of Evolution

an organism (population, species) cannot return to the previous state that was among its ancestors, even after returning to their habitat. It is possible to acquire only an incomplete number of external, but not functional, similarities with one’s ancestors. The law (principle) was formulated by the Belgian paleontologist Louis Dollot in 1893.

The Belgian paleontologist L. Dollo formulated the general position that evolution is an irreversible process. This position was subsequently confirmed many times and became known as Dollo's law. The author himself gave a very brief formulation of the law of irreversibility of evolution. He was not always correctly understood and sometimes provoked objections that were not entirely justified. According to Dollo, “the organism cannot return, even partially, to the previous state already achieved in the series of its ancestors.”

Examples of Dollo's Law

The law of irreversibility of evolution should not be expanded beyond the limits of its applicability. Terrestrial vertebrates descend from fish, and the five-fingered limb is the result of the transformation of the paired fin of a fish. A terrestrial vertebrate can again return to life in water, and the five-fingered limb again acquires the general shape of a fin. The internal structure of the fin-shaped limb, the flipper, retains, however, the main features of a five-fingered limb, and does not return to the original structure of a fish fin. Amphibians breathe with their lungs, but they have lost the gill breathing of their ancestors. Some amphibians returned to permanent life in the water and regained gill breathing. Their gills, however, represent larval external gills. The fish-type internal gills have disappeared forever. In tree-climbing primates, the first digit is reduced to a certain extent. In humans, descended from climbing primates, the first finger of the lower (hind) limbs again underwent significant progressive development (in connection with the transition to walking on two legs), but did not return to some initial state, but acquired a completely unique shape, position and development.

Consequently, not to mention the fact that progressive development is often replaced by regression, and regression is sometimes replaced by new progress. However, development never goes back along the path already traversed, and it never leads to a complete restoration of previous states.

Indeed, organisms, moving to their previous habitat, do not completely return to their ancestral state. Ichthyosaurs (reptiles) have adapted to living in water. However, their organization remained typically reptilian. The same goes for crocodiles. Mammals that live in water (whales, dolphins, walruses, seals) have retained all the features characteristic of this class of animals.

Law of organ oligomerization according to V.A. Dogel

In multicellular animals, during the course of biological evolution, there is a gradual decrease in the number of initially separate organs that perform similar or identical functions. In this case, organs can differentiate and each of them begins to perform different functions.

Discovered by V. A. Dogel:

“As differentiation occurs, oligomerization of organs occurs: they acquire a certain localization, and their number decreases more and more (with progressive morphophysiological differentiation of the remaining ones) and becomes constant for a given group of animals”

For the type annelids, body segmentation has a multiple, unsteady character, all segments are homogeneous.

In arthropods (descended from annelids) the number of segments is:

1. in most classes it is reduced

2. becomes permanent

3. individual segments of the body, usually combined into groups (head, chest, abdomen, etc.), specialize in performing certain functions.

Page 17. Remember

Jean Baptiste Lamarck. He mistakenly believed that all organisms strive for perfection. If with an example, then some cat strived to become a human). Another mistake was that he considered only the external environment to be an evolutionary factor.

2. What biological discoveries were made by the middle of the 19th century?

The most significant events of the first half of the 19th century were the formation of paleontology and the biological foundations of stratigraphy, the emergence of cell theory, the formation of comparative anatomy and comparative embryology, the development of biogeography and the widespread dissemination of transformist ideas. The central events of the second half of the 19th century were the publication of “The Origin of Species” by Charles Darwin and the spread of the evolutionary approach in many biological disciplines (paleontology, systematics, comparative anatomy and comparative embryology), the formation of phylogenetics, the development of cytology and microscopic anatomy, experimental physiology and experimental embryology, the formation concepts of a specific pathogen of infectious diseases, proof of the impossibility of spontaneous generation of life in modern natural conditions.

Page 21. Questions for review and assignments.

1. What geological data served as a prerequisite for Charles Darwin’s evolutionary theory?

The English geologist C. Lyell proved the inconsistency of J. Cuvier's ideas about sudden catastrophes changing the surface of the Earth, and substantiated the opposite point of view: the surface of the planet changes gradually, continuously under the influence of ordinary everyday factors.

2. Name the discoveries in biology that contributed to the formation of Charles Darwin’s evolutionary views.

The following biological discoveries contributed to the formation of Charles Darwin's views: T. Schwann created the cell theory, which postulated that living organisms consist of cells, the general features of which are the same in all plants and animals. This served as strong evidence of the unity of origin of the living world; K. M. Baer showed that the development of all organisms begins with the egg, and at the beginning of embryonic development in vertebrates belonging to different classes, a clear similarity of embryos is revealed at the early stages; While studying the structure of vertebrates, J. Cuvier established that all animal organs are parts of one integral system. The structure of each organ corresponds to the principle of the structure of the whole organism, and a change in one part of the body must cause changes in other parts; K. M. Baer showed that the development of all organisms begins with the egg, and at the beginning of embryonic development in vertebrates belonging to different classes, a clear similarity of embryos is revealed at the early stages;

3. Characterize the natural scientific prerequisites for the formation of Charles Darwin’s evolutionary views.

1. Heliocentric system.

2. Kant-Laplace theory.

3. Law of conservation of matter.

4. Achievements of descriptive botany and zoology.

5. Great geographical discoveries.

6. Discovery of the law of germinal similarity by K. Baer: “Embryos exhibit a certain similarity within the type.”

7. Achievements in the field of chemistry: Weller synthesized urea, Butlerov synthesized carbohydrates, Mendeleev created the periodic table.

8. Cell theory of T. Schwann.

9. A large number of paleontological finds.

10. Expedition material of Charles Darwin.

Thus, scientific facts collected in various fields of natural science contradicted previously existing theories of the origin and development of life on Earth. The English scientist Charles Darwin was able to correctly explain and generalize them, creating the theory of evolution.

4. What is the essence of J. Cuvier’s correlation principle? Give examples.

This is the law of the relationship between the parts of a living organism; according to this law, all parts of the body are naturally interconnected. If any part of the body changes, then there will directly be changes in other parts of the body (or organs, or organ systems). Cuvier is the founder of comparative anatomy and paleontology. He believed that if an animal has a large head, then it should have horns, to defend itself from enemies, and if there are horns, then there are no fangs, then it is a herbivore, if it is a herbivore, then it has a complex multi-chambered stomach, and if it has a complex stomach and feeds on plant foods , which means a very long intestine, since plant foods have little energy value, etc.

5. What role did the development of agriculture play in the formation of evolutionary theory?

In agriculture, various methods of improving old ones and introducing new, more productive breeds of animals and high-yielding varieties of animals began to be increasingly used, which undermined the belief in the immutability of living nature. These advances strengthened Charles Darwin's evolutionary views and helped him establish the principles of selection that underlie his theory.