BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol.

I – History and Scope of Biological Sciences -

Alberto M. Simonetta

HISTORY AND SCOPE OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES

Alberto M. Simonetta
Dipartimento di Biologia Animale e Genetica "L.Pardi", Università di Firenze, Italy

Keywords: History, antiquity, middle ages, paleontology, evolution, morphology,

physiology, genetics, behavior, ecology, ethics.

Contents

1. Ancient and Medieval Times up to the 16th Century

2. Post-Renaissance Developments
3. Paleontology and Evolution
4. Morphology and Physiology
5. Genetics
6. Behavior
7. Ecology and Applied Ecology
Bibliography
Biographical Sketch

Summary

This contribution briefly outlines the history of the main fields of the biological
sciences, with special attention to their theoretical aspects. It also outlines the
significance that the main fields of research and the current debates have for the broader
development of biological sciences and sketches some of the practical applications of
such researches. It considers as the underlying scopes of all biological research both the
understanding and reconstruction of the history of evolution, and the understanding and
consequent management of the networks of interactions at work in the different
environments.

However, it considers that such basic and broad scopes are, in fact, operationally
subdivided into groups of closely related disciplines, and therefore the actual
development of research is considered under these headings.

1. Ancient and Medieval Times up to the 16th Century

Since the dawn of humanity, every culture has accumulated experiences concerning the
broad field of biological sciences: knowledge of animals and plants, whether useful,
dangerous, beautiful and so on, on disease, reproduction, behavior. However, with all
peoples, except with the Ancient Greeks, and thence, following in their steps, the
Romans and later Western Europe, this wealth of information has been organized in
traditions, myths, well-tested and standardized practices, but not in such a manner that
we would qualify it as "science".

Also, with the Greeks the transition from such common lore to the rigorous tests of
unbiased experience, investigation for the sake of investigation, logical analysis and
development into a philosophical framework was quite a slow process. Something

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) 51

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol. I – History and Scope of Biological Sciences -
Alberto M. Simonetta

approaching scientific medical practices appear with the Hippocratic texts, most of them
undoubtedly due to Hippocrates (c460-c380 BC), while pure biological studies were the
single-handed creation of Aristotle (384-322 BC), even if it must be allowed that shortly
before his times, Democritus of Abdera (c455 BC) and Anaxagoras of Clazomene
(c500-c425 BC) had advanced some shrewd hypotheses within the framework of a
philosophy which may well be described as a "scientific philosophy".

Aristotle, his pupil Theophrastus (c380-c-286 BC) and a few others, whose writings are,
however, unfortunately lost, so that we barely know that they studied animals and
plants, pursued biological investigations for the sake of understanding nature, that is as
a philosophical enquiry However, their attitude soon vanished from the record of the
development of philosophy and sciences during the Roman empire, to leave room for
compilations, such as the Naturalis Historia by Pliny the senior, the sort of book aimed
at rounding up the education of the learned gentleman. Meanwhile, the anatomical and
medical studies continued at a steady, albeit slow advance. Considerable advances were
made in anatomy during Hellenistic times, and are mainly credited to Herophilus (c.290
BC) and Erasistratus (c.275), but still greater advances were made during Roman times,
these being illustrated by treatises such as those by Soranus (98-117 AD), Celsus (25
BC-50 AD), Oribasius (326-406 AD) etc. or by the famous herbal by Dioscorides
(probably late 1st century AD), in fact a treatise covering all aspects of pharmacopoeia.
A place apart, during this period, was Galen: his medical treatises were to become
almost standard for over a thousand years, and he, having no opportunity to practice
anatomy on human corpses, made extensive and quite accurate investigations in the
anatomy of a variety of animals (and, unfortunately, often assumed that his findings
would also apply to humans) and, moreover, opened new pathways into physiology
through admirable experiments on animals. However, such were the merits of Galen and
his self assurance, that he came to be assumed as a certain guide: he was the
unchallenged authority much more than was Aristotle. This became even more apparent
with the final triumph of Christianity, as the philosophy and religion of Galen could
easily be reconciled with Christian religion, while that of Aristotle could not.

During early medieval times there were no advances in biology in its broad meaning,
and what advances were made, mainly through the introduction of new drugs, were the
result of the development of Arab, or rather, Moslem culture, which had dutifully
appropriated most of the Classic science and gave it new impulse. Treatises such as
those of Avicenna, Rhazes and others were to become standard in later European
universities.

All this changed when, around 1100 AD, the economy of Western Europe began to
develop at a quick pace and, at the same time, European armies began to advance in
Spain, where the "re-conquest" was achieved some four centuries later by the
elimination of the last Moorish kingdom. In the East, as well, the temporary
establishment of so-called Latin or Frank states of Syria and Palestine in the 12t century,
as well as the, equally temporary, capture and partition of the Byzantine empire had a
great cultural impact. They were all conducive to intensive cultural exchanges, and
Greek scientific treatises, both in their original Greek, or in Arabic or Jewish
translations poured into Western Europe. It is estimated that between 1150 and 1350
some 5,000 scientific orphilosophical treatises were translated into Latin and were

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) 52

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol. I – History and Scope of Biological Sciences -
Alberto M. Simonetta

discussed in the new Universities, which began to develop at the same age.

Medical studies immediately profited from the new intellectual interests, and these were
joined with a revival of pure studies. So, while new compilations aiming to collect all
known evidence were successfully produced (such as those of Adelard of Bath, Vincent
of Beauvais or Thomas of Cantimpré for general natural history and the many medical
and surgical handbooks), also some new investigations were made, for instance by the
Emperor Frederic II or by his contemporary St. Albert the great.

The requirements of surgery soon prompted, first in Italy, fresh developments in

anatomy. The anatomy that had been practiced previously, as training for surgery, had
been made on swine; when chartering the University of Naples, emperor Frederic II had
recommended the dissection of human corpses. There is good evidence for human
dissection being made in the late 13th century, for instance by Guglielmo da Saliceto,
who died in 1277 or 1280, and an autopsy for suspect murder was ordered by four
physicians in Bologna in 1302. Anyway, the first certain instance of human dissections
by a master of anatomy was performed by Mondino de' Luzzi in 1315. Mondino made
several dissections and wrote a little treatise, which became immensely popular, but
which does not include anything new. The real development of the new anatomy had to
wait for another full century, although dissections were regularly made in Italian
universities, usually twice per year.

By the middle of the 15th century, the practice of human dissections was common in
Italy (even the corpse of a Pope was dissected to find the cause of death). Both artists
and physicians were practicing it and Leonardo, who had made over 30 autopsies and
made hundreds of wonderful drawings, planned an immense treatise in co-operation
with a brilliant young professor of anatomy, Marcantonio della Torre. Unfortunately,
the project collapsed because of the sudden death of Della Torre.

However, a junior contemporary of Leonardo, Berengario da Carpi (c1460-1530)

published a treatise which was both well illustrated and which included a number of
new discoveries and improvements on previous descriptions.

In fact the introduction of printing soon prompted not only the printing of traditional
texts, but also the production of a number of new books on all kinds of subjects. Among
the scientific texts, herbals were among the first and De virtutibus herbarum by a Macer
Floridus without figures was printed in 1477, an illustrated edition of the herbal by the
Pseudo-Apuleius platonicus, a text which had enjoyed a considerable repute since late
Roman times, was printed in 1482/3, soon followed by a number of medical and
anatomical texts both in Latin and vernacular editions.

2. Post-Renaissance Developments

Thereafter, the development of biological sciences was a steady one and is outlined in
another section of this Encyclopedia (see History of Biological Sciences). Therefore,
rather than attempt to summarize it and mention a few names of outstanding scholars, it
may be worthwhile to trace the development of what are nowadays the main scopes of
biology.

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) 53

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol. I – History and Scope of Biological Sciences -
Alberto M. Simonetta

It would be easy and at the same time quite correct to say that the biological sciences
are, indeed, a single science with a single scope: the understanding of the mechanisms
of life and how they worked through the ages to make the biosphere as it presently is;
with the complementary aim of being able to control biological factors for the
maximum benefit of mankind. This latter may well be considered as part and parcel of
the broader scope, as a comprehensive understanding is the prerequisite for control. Yet
the enormously varied range of phenomena investigated has, unavoidably, caused
specialization, and each one of these specialized branches of biology has, to some
extent, further scope of its own.

As we have seen, biological studies developed through Antiquity and the Middle Ages,
first with the aim of improving medical treatments, and to a much lesser degree in order
to gain a philosophical understanding of living beings.

However, while medical research remained the background for the advances in
descriptive anatomy and in physiology, it also showed a remarkable tendency, in post-
Renaissance times, to appropriate and further develop for its own purposes new fields of
research which were opened either for purely scientific purposes or to meet the needs of
other human activities. So, for instance, microbiology, in the broad sense of the study of
microscopic organisms, was primarily the result of the fortuitous discovery of these
organisms and, though the belief that epidemic diseases were due to material agents had
been standard for centuries, and the hypothesis that these were living beings had been
mooted since the 16th century, it was first developed for quite different purposes.
Indeed, the first systematic investigations on micro-organisms for practical purposes
were done with the aim of controlling diseases in the breeding of useful animals, such as
silkworms, or of agricultural products such as wines, beers etc. So, the significance of
microbiology for medicine was first systematically advocated by Henle in 1840,
basically on the evidence of Bassi's studies on silkworm's muscardine and Schwann's
studies on fermentations.

Likewise, genetics was first developed by botanists for what we would label as purely
academic purposes, though physicians were prompt to see its potential significance in
order to understand several human diseases.

Nowadays, the prevention and cure of diseases are to most people one of the main
purposes of biological studies, sometimes to the annoyance of non-medical biologists,
who complain that their medical colleagues get too big a share in the available resources
for research.

Indeed, important as medical research is, the claim by other biologists that, quite apart
from the purely scientific significance of research in any other field, even considering
only the applied aspects of biology, the progress in environmental sciences management
and development of resources promise, in the long run, such lasting benefits that they
should deserve greater investments than they get.

Apart from medical science, the different branches of biological sciences may, perhaps,
be grouped under two main titles: "The history of the biosphere" and "The conservation
and management of the biosphere". In addition, the significance of biological sciences

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) 54

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol. I – History and Scope of Biological Sciences -
Alberto M. Simonetta

for the development of philosophy and ethics may well be considered as a distinct scope
in itself.

It must be stressed that all the various distinctive branches of biology: morphology,
physiology, genetics, ecology, paleontology etc. impinge on each one of the three major
scopes of biological studies that we have just outlined; though, obviously, in different
manners and with different significance. Thus, for instance ecology is the very
foundation of environmental conservation, while applied paleontology, though much
less critical, is still of considerable relevance because of its significance in the discovery
of deposits of petrol, coal etc. The significance of the two is reversed when we consider
the evolutionary history of Earth.

3. Paleontology and Evolution

None of the scholars of antiquity or of the early Middle Ages suspected that fossils
might belong to organisms different form those presently living. By the 13th century,
opinions were divided as to the nature of fossils: some assumed that they were either
some sort of causal resemblance of rocks to living beings, lusus naturae, or that they
were aborted attempts of the inanimate Earth to produce living beings or, finally, that
they were the remains of animals that had died during the Biblical Flood. A few
scholars, like Boccaccio (the author of the "Decameron"), suspected that the fossils
could be much older than the "Flood". Leonardo da Vinci was unquestionably the first
to clearly understand the great antiquity of fossils and, in a rather obscure page
describing how the body of a monster became entombed in the rocks, may even have
guessed that these belonged to organisms different from the present ones. While
Leonardo never published anything, Fracastoro apparently took from him and advocated
these ideas, so that they were, somewhat later, published and credited to Fracastoro
himself.

The debate on fossils and on their antiquity continued through the 17th and the early
18th century, and by the end of the 17th century it also begun to be recognized, at least
in England and Italy, that the most common fossils appeared to belong to tropical
faunas, thus pointing to considerable environmental changes.

By the end of the 18th century, and the first two decades of the 19th, paleontology
became a well- established branch of science. While an increasing number of fossils
were being described by many scholars all over Europe, the outstanding contributions to
this transition came from Lamarck, Cuvier and Geoffroy St. Hilaire, who were then
working at the Museum d'Histoire Naturelle of Paris. While Lamarck, studying
invertebrates, advanced his evolutionary theory in full in 1809, Cuvier, still held by a
rigidly fixist stand, admitting that a number of species had vanished and that their
antiquity was very much greater than had been previously been considered as possible.
Geoffroy became a true evolutionist after 1830, during a long argument with Cuvier.
Such advances, and a new and enlarged scope for the study of fossils, were possible
because these three scholars were firmly establishing the practice of comparative
morphology.

As soon as a sound evolutionary theory was advanced by Darwin and Wallace in 1858

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) 55

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol. I – History and Scope of Biological Sciences -
Alberto M. Simonetta

(Darwin's basic "origin of Species" being published in 1859), comparative morphology

of fossils took a new turn in the minds of almost all the best anatomists and
paleontologists. While paleontology has since been developed as the reconstruction of
the actual history of the evolution of living beings, it is becoming more and more
integrated with all the other disciplines of biology, as well as taking advantage of the
advances in geology, paleoecology etc., as well as providing these disciplines, including
their applied branches, with a rich feed-back.

Figure 1. A tentative scheme of the phylogenetic relationship of eukaryotes.

Nowadays, apart from the more traditional challenges of the reconstruction of the
morphology, phylogeny and biology, including ecology, of the different post-Cambrian
and later organisms, the most exciting advances are in the field of the early Cambrian
and of the pre-Cambrian organisms as, most of these are so remarkably different from
later organisms, as to still defy the identification of their evolutionary connections with
them. There is also the feeling that a better understanding of them will uncover critical
evidence for the understanding of the origin of life itself, and for such critical
developments as the origin and relationships of multi-cellular organisms.

Quite apart from the immediate significance of applied paleontology in the location of
mineral resources, the basic significance of this branch of biology in the understanding
of the evolution of the different organisms will naturally impinge also in the field of
ethics, even if its use is still debated. Its significance relates to two different problems:

On the one hand, it provides the backbone to be able to reconstruct the evolution of
mankind, and the precise placing of man in his proper phylogenetic relationships offers
the (controversial) justification for using comparative behavioral data in the discussion
of the behavior of Man.

On another hand, it provides evidence of past environmental changes and, possibly,

some of the keys needed to foretell the risks that our familiar environments are now
sustaining.

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) 56

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol. I – History and Scope of Biological Sciences -
Alberto M. Simonetta

The development of evolutionary studies, taken as the development of general theories

as to the possible mechanisms of evolution, underwent four or, perhaps, five major
phases. Some hypotheses, as we have seen, about the possible transmutation of species
had been sporadically advanced rather early. Vague evolutionary ideas had been
advanced by Vanini (burnt at the stake in 1619); in the 17th century, and a first organic
evolutionary hypothesis was advanced by Father Athanasius Kircher S.J. in 1675 in
order to account for the fact that, even allowing for spontaneous generation for a large
number of animals, such as most invertebrates (a thesis that he staunchly advocated
even in front of Redi's evidence to the contrary), Noah's Ark was not big enough to hold
all the diverse animals that had been discovered around the world! So the Reverend
Father, suggested that the Ark actually preserved just a few hundred species and that all
the present species evolved from these after the 'Flood' by adaptation to local
environmental requirements.

Again, the idea of limited transmutation was advanced by Linnaeus in some of his later
books, by Buffon, by Bonnet whose ideas are at the root of Cuvier's theory of
catastrophes (he envisaged repeated crises which each time had made some substantial
improvements in all beings, and foresaw a final crisis in which apes and elephants and
other mammals would become so intelligent as to take the place of mankind, which,
having attained perfection would presumably leave this world and migrate to the
heavens). The first organic theory which may be considered of real significance was
developed in the first place by Lamarck, who envisaged the combined action of an
innate trend of all organisms towards an increasingly complicated and specialized
structure, this being actually molded by environmental factors. In the meantime, in
Germany several scholars, including Goethe, had advocated the thesis that all
organisms, and even their individual parts, were the result of the adaptive
transformations of a few basic structures; such was the idea, usually credited to Goethe,
but in fact older, that the various parts of the flower are actually modified leaves, or that
all parts of a vertebrate are actually modified repetitions of a model segment built
around a vertebra (a theory claimed by both Oken and Goethe!). Whether this so- called
'idealist morphology' can be taken as being an evolutionist attitude is debatable,
although it certainly produced some excellent comparative anatomy, and prepared the
ground both in Germany and in England for the prompt acceptance of evolutionary
theories when Darwin, finally, produced a really satisfactory theory.

The orthodox Darwinian wave was over by the time of Darwin's death. By then, almost
every scientist accepted the fact that evolution had occurred and was, possibly, still
occurring. However, for a number of different reasons, Darwin's theory based on more
or less random variability and selection by environmental requirements, met with
increasing criticism and for the next fifty years or so, a number of alternative, and
usually short lived, theories were advanced.

At this point, as genetics had made sufficient advances to be fully recruited into
evolutionary theories, came the development of the 'New synthesis' or 'Neo-Darwinian
synthesis'.

Neo-Darwinism soon became the dominant theory in the middle of the last century, and
is still the one most familiar to biologists, there being, however, some significant

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) 57

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol. I – History and Scope of Biological Sciences -
Alberto M. Simonetta

varieties stressing different models for the evolution and selection of characters (classic
neo-Darwinism, neutralism etc).

However, the rather chaotic and unpredictable aspects of evolution implicit in any of the
typical Darwinian theories, is considered unsatisfactory by a number of taxonomists,
their main criticism being that it allows for too big a margin of subjective assessment in
the significance of the evidence available and its low predictive value.

Thus, beginning in the late 1960s, a new wave started to spread, sparked by the
publication of the English translation of Hennig's cladistic theory of taxonomy.
Cladistics developed in a fair number of varieties, and has not directly challenged the
basic neo-Darwinian models of evolution. Its challenge is, however, implicit in the
regularities they presume.

Thus we can consider that presently, on one side, there is a steady progress in the
understanding of the different ways by which the variability, distribution, etc., of
populations develop, and of the mechanisms that bring about selection, or of the effects
that may result by the lack of such selection. There is no question that such progress is
generating the identification of an increasingly complicated pattern of interactions of
different possible mechanisms. On the other hand, while almost everyone pays lip
service to the goal of attaining the best possible reconstruction of phylogenies, and to
the desirable role in the improvement of classifications, the different schools are
increasingly at odds.

4. Morphology and Physiology

Since early in the 19th century, comparative anatomy and comparative physiology have
always been closely linked with the development of the reconstruction of the history of
life, for obvious reasons. Evolutionary morphology and physiology have largely been
the main trend in these studies, but gradually the scholars interests have been
increasingly attracted by functional morphology, and the related aspects of comparative
physiology in connection with adaptation to different environmental requirements. Nor
should the great significance that reproduction and development have in the
understanding of the overall biology of the different living beings be overlooked.
Indeed, all the different aspects of development have an undoubted significance for the
correct interpretation of morphology and evolution (though certainly not by the
simplistic assumption that 'ontogeny repeats or summarizes phylogeny', as advocated by
Haeckel and sometimes still repeated in popular texts), but they are quite often
significant for the understanding of the functioning of genetic mechanisms, and even
have relevant practical significance, which promises great rewards especially in the field
of transplants and other therapeutic practices.

If we consider all the various purposes to which morphology and physiology may
contribute significant advances the list is a fairly long one:

First comes the traditional scope of understanding the phylogenetic significance of the
special features of the different structures: the different structures may be either
homologous or analogous, but these are relative concepts, which must be understood in

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) 58

BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE FUNDAMENTALS AND SYSTEMATICS – Vol. I – History and Scope of Biological Sciences -
Alberto M. Simonetta
-

-
conservation and management are, by now inseparable, and the very possibility of a
conservation based solely on leaving nature alone is by now almost always impossible.
-

This obviously has a number of philosophical, including ethical, implications, which are
briefly mentioned elsewhere (see The Philosophy of Biology). Moreover, besides the
TO ACCESS
common problem ALL THE
of the necessity for an15 PAGES
urgency OF THIS whilst
in management CHAPTER,
basic scientific
Visit: http://www.eolss.net/Eolss-sampleAllChapter.aspx
knowledge and adequate techniques are not yet really available, there is often the
problem of the conflict between short term interests of human communities versus long
term management of resources.

Bibliography

Barbieri M. (2000) I codici organici. Pequod: Ancona [A monograph expounding the evidence for the
existence of additional 'codes' besides the genetic code of nucleic acids].
Mayr E. (1982) The Growth of Biological Thought. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. [An
excellent account of the development of evolutionary theories].
Minelli A. (1993) Biological Systematics, the state of the art. Chapman and Hall: London [A most useful
reference, to appreciate the various approaches to systematics]
Simonetta A. (in press) A Short History of Biology. Backhuys Publishers: Leiden [A comprehensive
history of biology since its origin to the beginning of the 20th century].
Sober E (1991) Reconstructing the Past, Parsimony, Evolution, and Inference [A still standard and
balanced book on the theoretical problems of modern methods in evolutionary taxonomy]
Strickberger MW (2000) Evolution. Jones and Bartlett:Sudbury, Ma [A good textbook on the
evolutionary mechanisms and the main lines in the development of the history of life].

Biographical Sketch

Alberto M. Simonetta, born 1930, is full Professor of Zoology at the University of Florence (Italy). He
studied in Florence, where he had his first appointments as 'assistant' and was appointed as full Professor
of Comparative Anatomy at the University of Camerino in 1969. His major research interests are the
comparative anatomy and evolution of vertebrates and of arthropods, including fossils, theoretic aspects
of evolutionary taxonomy and the history of biology.

©Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) 65