Abstract
Abstract After several decades of very active research in comparative animal physiology, an outside observer currently might get the impression that the situation has changed radically. A recent documentation of the success of comparative animal physiology is, for example, given in the book Biochemical Adaptation: Mechanism and Process in Physiological Evolution by Peter Hochachka and George Somero (2002). With the success of molecular biological techniques, however, sayings like “Everything or everyone goes molecular” are frequently encountered in discussions on future perspectives of scientific work in biological sciences. Departments and institutes are being renamed, the “evolutionary” aspect is replacing the “comparative” angle. More and more referees and thus journals and funding agencies ask for the mechanistic (“molecular”) part of the story, and disapprove of the descriptive (“physiological”) part, irrespective of the fact that the story “Factor A increases during hypoxia, activates transcription factor B, and this results in the expression of protein C” is as descriptive as the reported cardiovascular modifications encountered on hypoxic exposure. Is this the end of comparative physiology?
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
