Note to users. If you're seeing this message, it means that your browser cannot find this page's style/presentation instructions -- or possibly that you are using a browser that does not support current Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing, and what you can do to make your experience of our site the best it can be.

Science 14 April 1978:
Vol. 200. no. 4338, pp. 209 - 211
DOI: 10.1126/science.635583
Prev | Table of Contents | Next

Articles

Science, Vol 200, Issue 4338, 209-211
Copyright © 1978 by American Association for the Advancement of Science

articles

Frog perspective on the morphological difference between humans and chimpanzees

LM Cherty, SM Case, and AC Wilson

The body shapes of humans and chimpanzees were compared quantitatively by criteria chosen for their capacity to discriminate well among the body shapes of frogs. By these criteria, the difference in body shape between humans and chimpanzees was found to be greater than that between the most dissimilar pairs of frogs examined--that is, frogs classified in separate taxonomic suborders. Even though the morphological diffference between the two primates is large by frog standards, the biochemical differences between the structural genes of these two species are small. The results of this study give quantitative support to the proposal that morphological evolution and biochemical evolution in structural genes can proceed at independent rates.


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES:
High level of cryptic species diversity revealed by sympatric lineages of Southeast Asian forest frogs.
B. L Stuart, R. F Inger, and H. K Voris (2006)
Biol Lett 2, 470-474
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
Neutral Evolution of the Nonbinding Region of the Anthocyanin Regulatory Gene Ipmyb1 in Ipomoea.
S.-M. Chang, Y. Lu, and M. D. Rausher (2005)
Genetics 170, 1967-1978
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
GAI Homologues in the Hawaiian Silversword Alliance (Asteraceae-Madiinae): Molecular Evolution of Growth Regulators in a Rapidly Diversifying Plant Lineage.
D. L. Remington and M. D. Purugganan (2002)
Mol. Biol. Evol. 19, 1563-1574
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
Proposal for a standardized temporal scheme of biological classification for extant species.
J. C. Avise and G. C. Johns (1999)
PNAS 96, 7358-7363
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »
Chimpanzee kinship.
C. Jolly, J. Oates, and T. Disotell (1995)
Science 268, 185-188
   PDF »
Paedomorphosis and neoteny in the pygmy chimpanzee.
B. Shea (1983)
Science 222, 521-522
   Abstract »    PDF »
M--Statistics and Morphometric Divergence.
W. R. ATCHLEY (1980)
Science 208, 1059-1060
   PDF »
M--Statistics and Morphometric Divergence.
J. G. KUNKEL, L. M. CHERRY, S. M. CASE, and A. C. WILSON (1980)
Science 208, 1060-1061
   PDF »
Comparisons of frogs, humans, and chimpanzees.
J. Findley (1979)
Science 204, 434-435
   PDF »
Comparisons of Frogs, Humans, and Chimpanzees.
L. M. CHERRY, S. M. CASE, J. G. KUNKEL, and A. C. WILSON (1979)
Science 204, 435
   PDF »
Do Albumin Clocks Run on Time?.
S. S. CARLSON, A. C. WILSON, and R. D. MAXSON (1978)
Science 200, 1183-1185
   PDF »
From the Cover: Accelerated regulatory gene evolution in an adaptive radiation.
M. Barrier, R. H. Robichaux, and M. D. Purugganan (2001)
PNAS 98, 10208-10213
   Abstract »    Full Text »    PDF »


To Advertise     Find Products

Science. ISSN 0036-8075 (print), 1095-9203 (online)