Ackerly, S. C. (1989). Kinematics of accretionary shell growth, with examples from brachiopods and molluscs. Paleobiology, 15, 147–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ackerly, S. C. (1992). The structure of ontogenetic variation in the shell ofPecten. Palaeontology, 35, 847–867.Google Scholar

Alberch, P. (1982). Developmental constraints in evolutionary processes. In Evolution and Development, ed. Bonner, J. T., pp. 313–332. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alberch, P. (1989). The logic of monsters: evidence for internal constraint in development and evolution. Geobios, mémoire spécial, 12, 21–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alberch, P. (1991). From genes to phenotype: dynamical systems and evolvability. Genetica, 84, 5–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Alberch, P. and Gale, E. A. (1985). A developmental analysis of an evolutionary trend: digital reduction in amphibians. Evolution, 39, 8–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Alberch, P., Gould, S. J., Oster, G. F., and Wake, D. B. (1979). Size and shape in ontogeny and phylogeny. Paleobiology, 5, 296–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Antonovics, J. and Tienderen, P. H. (1991). Ontoecogenophyloconstraints? The chaos of constraint terminology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 6, 166–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Arnold, S. J., Pfrender, M. E., and Jones, A. G. (2001). The adaptive landscape as a conceptual bridge between micro- and macroevolution. Genetica, 112–113, 9–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bambach, R. K., Knoll, A. H., and Wang, S. C. (2004). Origination, extinction, and mass depletions in marine diversity. Paleobiology, 30, 522–542.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bateson, W. (1896). Materials for the Study of Variation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

Bayer, U. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1984). Iterative evolution of Middle Jurassic ammonite faunas. Lethaia, 17, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bayer, U. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1985). Evolution in marginal epicontinental basins: the role of phylogenetic and ecological factors (ammonite replacements in the German Lower and Middle Jurassic). In Sedimentary and Evolutionary Cycles, eds. Bayer, U. and Seilacher, A., pp. 164–220. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berger, W. H. (1969). Planktonic foraminifera: basic morphology and ecologic implications. Journal of Paleontology, 43, 1369–1383.Google Scholar

Blomberg, S. P. and Garland, T. (2002). Tempo and mode in evolution: phylogenetic inertia, adaptation and comparative methods. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 15, 899–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bonner, J. T. (1982). Evolution and Development: Report of the Dahlem Workshop on Evolution and Development, Berlin 1981. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bookstein, F. L. (1977). The study of shape transformation after D'Arcy Thompson. Mathematical Biosciences, 43, 177–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bookstein, F. L. (1997). Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data: Geometry and Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Brasier, M. D. (1980). Microfossils. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar

Cain, A. J. (1977). Variation in the spire index of some coiled gastropod shells, and its evolutionary significance. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (B: biological sciences), 277, 377–428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Callebaut, W. and Rasskin-Gutman, D. (2005). Modularity: Understanding the Development and Evolution of Natural Complex Systems. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Cattin, M.-F., Bersier, L.-F., Banašek-Richter, C., Baltensperger, R., and Gabriel, J.-P. (2004). Phylogenetic constraints and adaptation explain food-web structure. Nature, 427, 835–839.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. (1976). Flow patterns and drag coefficients of cephalopod shells. Palaeontology, 19, 539–563.Google Scholar

Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. (1981). Hydromechanical design of fossil cephalopods. Systematics Association Special Volume, 18, 289–336.Google Scholar

Checa, A. G., Okamoto, T., and Keupp, H. (2002). Abnormalities as natural experiments: a morphologic model for coiling regulation in planispiral ammonites. Paleobiology, 28, 127–138.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cheetham, A. H. and Hayek, L. C. (1983). Geometric consequences of branching growth in adeoniform Bryozoa. Paleobiology, 9, 240–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ciampaglio, C. N. (2002). Determining the role that ecological and develop-mental constraints play in controlling disparity: examples from the crinoid and blastozoan fossil record. Evolution and Development, 4, 170–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Conway Morris, S. (1998). The Crucible of Creation: The Burgess Shale and the Rise of Animals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Conway Morris, S. (2003). Life's Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cook, T. A. (1914). The Curves of Life. London: Constable and Company.Google Scholar

Cortie, M. B. (1989). Models for mollusc shape. South African Journal of Science, 85, 454–460.Google Scholar

Cubo, J. (2004). Pattern and process in constructional morphology. Evolution and Development, 6, 131–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray.Google Scholar

Davoli, F. and Russo, F. (1974). Una metodologia paleontometrica basata sul modello di Raup:verifica sperimentale su rappresentanti follili del gen. Subula Schumacher. Bollettino della Società Paleontologica Italiana, 13, 108–121.Google Scholar

Dawkins, R. (1996). Climbing Mount Improbable. New York: W. W. Norton and Co.Google Scholar

Dennett, D. C. (1996). Darwin's Dangerous Idea. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar

Dobzhanski, T. (1970). Genetics of the Evolutionary Process. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Dommergues, J.-L., Laurin, B., and Meister, C. (1996). Evolution of ammonoid morphospace during the Early Jurassic radiation. Paleobiology, 22, 219–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eble, G. J. (2000). Theoretical morphology: state of the art. Paleobiology, 26, 520–528.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eble, G. J. (2003). Developmental morphospaces and evolution. In Evolutionary Dynamics:Exploring the Interplay of Selection, Accident, Neutrality, and Function, eds. Crutchfield, J. P. and Schuster, P., pp. 33–63. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ellers, O. (1993). A mechanical model of growth in regular sea urchins: predictions of shape and a developmental morphospace. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B254, 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ellison, A. M. and Niklas, K. J. (1988). Branching patterns of Salicornia europaea (Chenopodiaceae) at different successional stages: a comparison of theoretical and real plants. American Journal of Botany, 75, 501–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ferguson, S. A. (2002). Methodology in evolutionary psychology. Biology and Philosophy, 17, 635–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1941). Average excess and average effect of a gene substitution. Annals of Eugenics, 11, 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Foley, J. and Dam, A. (1982). Fundamentals of Interactive Computer Graphics. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar

Fortey, R. A. (1983). Geometric constraints in the construction of graptolite stipes. Paleobiology, 9, 116–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Funk, and Wagnall, (1963). Standard College Dictionary. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc.Google Scholar

Futuyma, D. (1998). Evolutionary Biology. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates, Inc.Google Scholar

Gärdenfors, P. (2000). Conceptual Spaces: the Geometry of Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Gavrilets, S. (1997). Evolution and speciation on holey adaptive landscapes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 12, 307–312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gavrilets, S. (1999). A dynamical theory of speciation on holey adaptive landscapes. American Naturalist, 154, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gavrilets, S. (2003). Evolution and speciation in a hyperspace: the roles of neutrality, selection, mutation, and random drift. In Evolutionary Dynamics: Exploring the Interplay of Selection, Accident, Neutrality, and Function, eds. Crutchfield, J. P. and Schuster, P., pp. 135–162. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gavrilets, S. and Gravner, J. (1997). Percolation on the fitness hypercube and the evolution of reproductive isolation. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 184, 51–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Goodwin, B. C. (1963). Temporal Organization in Cells. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Gould, S. J. (1976). D'Arcy Thompson and the science of form. In Topics in the Philosophy of Biology, eds. Grene, M. and Mendelsohn, E., pp. 66–97. Dortrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar

Gould, S. J. (1989). Wonderful Life. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar

Gould, S. J. (1991). The disparity of the Burgess Shale arthropod fauna and the limits of cladistic analysis: why we must strive to quantify morphospace. Paleobiology, 17, 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gould, S. J. (1993). How to analyze Burgess Shale disparity – a reply to Ridley. Paleobiology, 19, 522–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gould, S. J. (1995). A task for paleobiology at the threshold of majority. Paleobiology, 21, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hammer, Ø. and Bucher, H. (2005). Models for the morphogenesis of the molluscan shell. Lethaia, 38, 111–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hertel, F. and Lehman, N. (1998). A randomized nearest-neighbor approach for assessment of character displacement: the vulture guild as a model. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 190, 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hickman, C. S. (1993). Theoretical design space: a new paradigm for the analysis of structural diversity. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 190, 169–182.Google Scholar

Honda, H. and Fisher, J. B. (1978). Tree branch angle: maximizing effective leaf area. Science, 199, 888–890.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hutchinson, J. M. C. (1999). But which morphospace to use?Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 14, 414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jablonski, D. (2005). Evolutionary innovations in the fossil record: the intersection of ecology, development, and macroevolution. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B (Molecular and Developmental Evolution), 304B, 504–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kauffman, S. A. (1993). The Origins of Order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kauffman, S. A. (1995). At Home in the Universe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Keller, E. F. (2002). Making Sense of Life: Explaining Biological Development with Models, Metaphors, and Machines. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Kendrick, D. C. (2007). Theoretical morphology of crinoid calyxes. Paleobiology, in press.Google Scholar

Kershaw, S. and Riding, R. (1978). Parameterization of stromatoporoid shape. Lethaia, 11, 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kohn, A. J. and Riggs, A. C. (1975). Morphometry of the Conus shell. Systematic Zoology, 24, 346–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Korn, D. (2000). Morphospace occupation of ammonoids over the Devonian–Carboniferous boundary. Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 74, 247–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhn-Schnyder, E. and Rieber, H. (1986). Handbook of Paleozoology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

McCartney, K. and Loper, D. E. (1989). Optimized skeletal morphologies of silicoflagellate genera Dictyocha and Distephanus. Paleobiology, 15, 283–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCartney, K. and Loper, D. E. (1992). Optimal models of skeletal morphology for the silicoflagellate genus Corbisema. Micropaleontology, 38, 87–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1980a). Shell form in the biconvex articulate Brachiopoda: a geometric analysis. Paleobiology, 6, 57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1980b). Shell geometry and stability strategies in the biconvex Brachiopoda. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Monatshefte, 1980(3), 155–184.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1988). The Late Devonian extinction event: evidence for abrupt ecosystem collapse. Paleobiology, 14, 250–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1991). Theoretical morphology: the concept and its applications. In Analytical Paleobiology, eds. Gilinsky, N. L. and Signor, P. W., pp. 87–102. Short Courses in Paleontology No. 4, the Paleontological Society and the Univeristy of Tennessee, Knoxville.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1995). Geometry of evolution in the biconvex Brachiopoda: morphological effects of mass extinction. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 197, 357–382.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1999). Theoretical Morphology: the Concept and Its Applications. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2001a). Exploring the spectrum of existent, nonexistent and impossible biological form. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 16, 172–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2001b). The question of spiral axes and brachiopod shell growth: a comparison of morphometric techniques. Paleobiology, 27, 716–723.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2006). Exploring the spectrum of existent, nonexistent, and impossible biological form: a research program. In Modeling Biology: Structures, Behaviors, Evolution, eds. Laubichler, M. and G. B. Müller, pp. in press. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. and McKinney, F. K. (2000). A theoretical morphologic analysis of convergently evolved erect helical colony form in the Bryozoa. Paleobiology, 26, 556–577.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. and McKinney, F. K. (2002). A theoretical morphologic analysis of ecomorphologic variation in Archimedes helical colony form. Palaios, 17, 556–570.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. and Starcher, R. W. (2006). Geometric models of lophophore shape and arrangement in extinct modular organisms. Journal of Paleontology, in press.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr., Bayer, U., and Seilacher, A. (1991). Biological and evolutionary responses to transgressive-regressive cycles. In Cycles and Events in Stratigraphy, eds. Einsele, G., Ricken, W., and A. Seilacher, pp. 696–708. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr., Sheehan, P. M., Bottjer, D. J., and Droser, M. L. (2004). Ecological ranking of Phanerozoic biodiversity crises: ecological and taxonomic severities are decoupled. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 211, 289–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGowan, A. J. (2004). The effect of the Permo-Triassic bottleneck on Triassic ammonoid morphological evolution. Paleobiology, 30, 369–395.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McHenry, M. J. and Patek, S. N. (2004). The evolution of larval morphology and swimming performance in ascidians. Evolution, 58, 1209–1224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Mack, R. N. (2003). Phylogenetic constraint, absent life forms, and preadapted alien plants: a prescription for biological invasions. International Journal of Plant Science, 164(3 Supplement), S185–S196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McKinney, F. K. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2003). Evolution of erect helical colony form in the Bryozoa: phylogenetic, functional, and ecological factors. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 80, 360–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McKinney, F. K. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2004). Erratum: Evolution of erect helical colony form in the Bryozoa. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 81, 619–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McKinney, F. K. and Raup, D. M. (1982). A turn in the right direction: simulation of erect spiral growth in the bryozoans Archimedes and Bugula. Paleobiology, 8, 101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McKitrick, M. C. (1993). Phylogenetic constraint in evolutionary theory: has it any explanatory power?Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 24, 307–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maclaurin, J. (2003). The good, the bad and the impossible. Biology and Philosophy, 18, 463–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maynard Smith, J., Burian, R., Kauffman, S., Alberch, P., Campbell, J., Goodwin, B., Lande, R., Raup, D., and Wolpert, L. (1985). Developmental constraints and evolution. Quarterly Review of Biology, 60, 265–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Merks, R. M. H., Hoekstra, A. G., Kaandorp, J. A., Sloot, P. M. A., and Hogeweg, P. (2006). Problem-solving environments for biological morphogenesis. Computing in Science and Engineering, 8(1), 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meyer, A. (2003). There and back again. Nature, 424, 255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minelli, A. (2003). The Development of Animal Form: Ontogeny, Morphology, and Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Müller, G. B. and Newman, S. A. (2003). Origination of Organismal Form: Beyond the Gene in Deveopmental and Evolutionary Biology. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Müller, G. B. and Newman, S. A. (2005). The innovation triad: an evodevo agenda. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B (Molecular and Developmental Evolution), 304B, 487–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Müller, G. B. and Wagner, G. P. (1991). Novelty in evolution: restructuring the concept. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 22, 229–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Newman, M. E. J. and Palmer, R. G. (2003). Modeling Extinction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Niklas, K. J. (1986). Computer-simulated plant evolution. Scientific American, 254 (March), 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Niklas, K. J. (1997a). Effects of hypothetical developmental barriers and abrupt environmental changes on adaptive walks in a computer-generated domain for early vascular land plants. Paleobiology, 23, 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Niklas, K. J. (1997b). The Evolutionary Biology of Plants. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Niklas, K. J. (2004). Computer models of early land plant evolution. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 32, 47–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Niklas, K. J. (2006). Optimization and early land plant evolution. In Modeling Biology: Structures, Behavior, Evolution, eds. Laubichler, M. and Müller, G. B., in press. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Niklas, K. J. and Kerchner, V. (1984). Mechanical and photosynthetic constraints on the evolution of plant shape. Paleobiology, 10, 79–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Okamoto, T. (1988). Analysis of heteromorph ammonoids by differential geometry. Palaeontology, 31, 35–52.Google Scholar

Olsen, E. C. and Miller, R. L. (1958). Morphological Integration. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Oster, G. F., Shubin, N., Murray, J. D., and Alberch, P. (1988). Evolution and morphogenetic rules: the shape of the vertebrate limb in ontogeny and phylogeny. Evolution, 42, 862–884.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Popov, I. Y. (2002). “Periodical systems” in biology (a historical issue). Verhandlungen zur Geschichte und Theorie der Biologie, 9, 55–68.Google Scholar

Rasskin-Gutman, D. (2003). Boundary constraints for the emergence of form. In Origination of Organismal Form: Beyond the Gene in Developmental and Evolutionary Biology, eds. Müller, G. B. and Newman, S. A., pp. 305–322. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Rasskin-Gutman, D. (2005). Modularity: jumping forms within morphospace. In Modularity: Understanding the Development and Evolution of Natural Complex Systems, eds. Callebaut, M. and Rasskin-Gutman, D., pp. 207–219. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Rasskin-Gutman, D. and Buscalioni, A. D. (2001). Theoretical morphology of the Archosaur (Reptilia: Diapsida) pelvic girdle. Paleobiology, 27, 59–78.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rasskin-Gutman, D. and Izpisúa-Belmonte, J. C. (2004). Theoretical morphology of developmental asymmetries. BioEssays, 26, 405–412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Raup, D. M. (1961). The geometry of coiling in gastropods. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA), 47, 602–609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Raup, D. M. (1966). Geometric analysis of shell coiling: general problems. Journal of Paleontology, 40, 1178–1190.Google Scholar

Raup, D. M. (1967). Geometric analysis of shell coiling: coiling in ammonoids. Journal of Paleontology, 41, 43–65.Google Scholar

Raup, D. M. and Michelson, A. (1965). Theoretical morphology of the coiled shell. Science, 147, 1294–1295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Raup, D. M., McGhee, G. R. Jr., and McKinney, F. K. (2006). Source code for theoretical morphologic simulation of helical colony form in the Bryozoa. Palaeontologia Electronica, 9(2); http://palaeo-electronica.org/paleo/2006_2/helical/index.html.Google Scholar

Reif, W.-E. (1980). A model of morphogenetic processes in the dermal skeleton of elasmobranchs. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 159, 339–359.Google Scholar

Rex, M. A. and Boss, K. J. (1976). Open coiling in recent gastropods. Malacologia, 15, 289–297.Google Scholar

Rice, S. H. (1997). The analysis of ontogenetic trajectories: when a change in size or shape is not heterochrony. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 94, 907–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Richtsmeier, J. T. and Lele, S. (1993). A coordinate-free approach to the analysis of growth patterns: models and theoretical considerations. Biological Reviews, 68, 381–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ridley, M. (1996). Evolution. Cambridge (MA): Blackwell Science.Google Scholar

Russell, E. S. (1916). Form and Function: a Contribution to the History of Animal Morphology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (1982 Reprint).Google Scholar

Saunders, W. B. and Swan, A. R. H. (1984). Morphology and morphologic diversity of mid-Carboniferous (Namurian) ammonoids in time and space. Paleobiology, 10, 195–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Saunders, W. B., Work, D. M., and Nikolaeva, S. V. (2004). The evolutionary history of shell geometry in Paleozoic ammonoids. Paleobiology, 30, 19–43.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Savazzi, E. (1985). SHELLGEN: A BASIC program for the modeling of molluscan shell ontogeny and morphogenesis. Computers and Geosciences, 11, 521–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Savazzi, E. (1987). Geometric and functional constraints on bivalve shell morphology. Lethaia, 20, 293–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Savazzi, E. (1990). C programs for displaying shaded three-dimensional objects on a PC. Computers and Geosciences, 16, 195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Savazzi, E. (1993). C++ classes for theoretical shell morphology. Computers and Geosciences, 19, 931–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schindel, D. E. (1990). Unoccupied morphospace and the coiled geometry of gastropods: architectural constraint or geometric covariation? In Causes of Evolution, eds. Ross, R. A. and Allmon, W. D., pp. 270–304. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Schwenk, K. (1995). A utilitarian approach to constraint. Zoology, 98, 251–262.Google Scholar

Signes, M., Bijma, J., Hemleben, C., and Ott, R. (1993). A model for planktic foraminiferal shell growth. Paleobiology, 19, 71–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Simpson, G. G. (1944). Tempo and Mode in Evolution. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Simpson, G. G. (1953). The Major Features of Evolution. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Snoad, N. and Nilsson, M. (2003). Quasispecies evolution on dynamic fitness landscapes. In Evolutionary Dynamics: Exploring the Interplay of Selection, Accident, Neutrality, and Function, eds. Crutchfield, J. P. and Schuster, P., pp. 273–289. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Solé, R. (2002). Modelling macroevolutionary patterns: an ecological perspective. In Biological Evolution and Statistical Physics, eds. Lässig, M. and Valleriani, A., pp. 312–337. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Solé, R. and Goodwin, B. (2000). Signs of Life: How Complexity Pervades Biology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Stadler, P. F. (2002). Fitness landscapes. In Biological Evolution and Statistical Physics, eds. Lässig, M. and Valleriani, A., pp. 183–204. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stadler, B. M. R. and Stadler, P. F. (2004). The topology of evolutionary biology. In Modeling in Molecular Biology, eds. Ciobanu, G. and Rozenberg, G., pp. 267–286. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stadler, B. M. R., Stadler, P. F., Wagner, G. P., and Fontana, W. (2001). The topology of the possible: formal spaces underlying patterns of evolutionary change. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 213, 241–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Starcher, R. W. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2000). Fenestrate theoretical morphology: geometric constraints on lophophore shape and arrangement in extinct Bryozoa. Paleobiology, 26, 116–136.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Starcher, R. W. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2002). Theoretical morphology of modular organisms: geometric constraints of branch and dissepiment width and spacing in fenestrate bryozoans. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 223, 79–122.Google Scholar

Starcher, R. W. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2003). Fenestrate graptolite theoretical morphology: geometric constraints on lophophore shape and arrangement in extinct hemichordates. Journal of Paleontology, 77, 360–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stone, J. R. (1996). Computer simulated shell shape and size variation in the Caribbean land snail genus Cerion: a test of geometrical constraints. Evolution, 50, 341–347.Google ScholarPubMed

Stone, J. R. (1998). Ontogenic tracks and evolutionary vestiges in morphospace. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 64, 223–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stone, J. R. (1999). Using a mathematical model to test the null hypothesis of optimal shell construction by four marine gastropods. Marine Biology, 134, 397–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stone, J. R. (2002). Delayed prezygotic isolating mechanisms: evolution with a twist. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 269, 861–865.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Stone, J. R. (2004). Nonoptimal shell forms as overlapping points in functional and theoretical morphospaces. American Malacological Bulletin, 18, 129–134.Google Scholar

Strathmann, R. R. (1978). Progressive vacating of adaptive types during the Phanerozoic. Evolution, 32, 907–914.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Streidter, G. F. (2003). Epigenesis and evolution of brains: from embryonic divisions to functional systems. In Origination of Organismal Form: Beyond the Gene in Developmental and Evolutionary Biology, eds. Müller, G. B. and Newman, S. A., pp. 287–303. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Swan, A. R. H. (1990). A computer simulation of evolution by natural selection. Journal of the Geological Society of London, 147, 223–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Swan, A. R. H. (1999). Computer models of fossil morphology. In Numerical Palaeobiology, ed. Harper, D. A. T., pp. 157–179. London: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar

Swan, A. R. H. and Kershaw, S. (1994). A computer model for skeletal growth of stromatoporoids. Palaeontology, 37, 409–423.Google Scholar

Thom, R. (1975). Structural Stability and Morphogenesis: an Outline of a General Theory of Models. Reading, MA: W. A. Benjamin, Inc.Google Scholar

Thomas, R. D. K. (2005). Hierarchial integration of modular structures in the evolution of animal skeletons. In Modularity: Understanding the Development and Evolution of Natural Complex Systems, eds. Callebaut, M. and Rasskin-Gutman, D., pp. 239–258. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Thomas, R. D. K. and Reif, W.-E. (1993). The skeleton space: a finite set of organic designs. Evolution, 47, 341–360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Thomas, R. D. K., Shearman, R. M., and Stewart, G. W. (2000). Evolutionary exploitation of design options by the first animals with hard skeletons. Science, 288, 1239–1242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Thompson, D'A. W. (1917). On Growth and Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thompson, D'A. W. (1942). On Growth and Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Tyszka, J. (2006). Morphospace of foraminiferal shells: results from the moving reference model. Lethaia, 39, 1–12.Google Scholar

Tyszka, J. and Topa, P. (2005). A new approach to modeling of foraminiferal shells. Paleobiology, 31, 522–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ubukata, T. (2000). Theoretical morphology of hinge and shell form in Bivalvia: geometric constraints derived from space conflict between umbones. Paleobiology, 26, 606–624.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ubukata, T. (2001). Stacking increments: a new model and morphospace for the analysis of bivalve shell growth. Historical Biology, 15, 303–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ubukata, T. (2003a). A theoretical morphologic analysis of bivalve ligaments. Paleobiology, 29, 369–380.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ubukata, T. (2003b). Pattern of growth rate around aperture and shell form in Bivalvia: a theoretical morphological study. Paleobiology, 29, 480–491.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ubukata, T. (2005). Theoretical morphology of bivalve shell sculptures. Paleobiology, 31, 643–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Valen, L. (1973). A new evolutionary theory. Evolutionary Theory, 1, 1–30.Google Scholar

Valkenburgh, B. (1985). Locomotor diversity within past and present guilds of large predatory mammals. Paleobiology, 11, 406–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Valkenburgh, B. (1988). Trophic diversity in past and present guilds of large predatory mammals. Paleobiology, 14, 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Waddington, C. H. (1957). The Strategy of the Genes: a Discussion of some Aspects of Theoretical Biology. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar

Waddington, C. H. (1975). The Evolution of an Evolutionist. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Wagner, G. P. (2001). What is the promise of developmental evolution? Part II: A causal explanation of evolutionary innovations may be impossible. Journal of Experimental Zoology, 291, 305–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wagner, G. P. and Altenberg, L. (1996). Complex adaptations and the evolution of evolvability. Evolution, 50, 967–976.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ward, P. (1980). Comparative shell shape distributions in Jurassic–Cretaceous ammonites and Jurassic-Tertiary nautilids. Paleobiology, 6, 32–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Waters, J. A. (1977). Quantification of shape by use of Fourier analysis: the Mississippian blastoid genus Pentremites. Paleobiology, 3, 288–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Williamson, P. G. (1981). Palaeontological documentation of speciation in Cenozoic molluscs from Turkana Basin. Nature, 293, 437–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wilson, E. O. and Bossert, W. H. (1971). A Primer of Population Biology. Sunderland: Sinauer.Google Scholar

Wolfram, S. (2002). A New Kind of Science. Champaign, IL: Wolfram Media, Inc.Google Scholar

Wray, G. A. (2002). Do convergent developmental mechanisms underlie convergent phenotypes?Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 59, 327–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wright, S. (1932). The roles of mutation, inbreeding, crossbreeding and selection in evolution. Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Genetics, 1, 356–366.Google Scholar

Zwieniecki, M. A., Boyce, C. K., and Holbrook, N. M. (2004). Functional design space of single-veined leaves: role of tissue hydraulic properties in constraining leaf size and shape. Annals of Botany, 94, 507–513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ackerly, S. C. (1989). Kinematics of accretionary shell growth, with examples from brachiopods and molluscs. Paleobiology, 15, 147–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ackerly, S. C. (1992). The structure of ontogenetic variation in the shell ofPecten. Palaeontology, 35, 847–867.Google Scholar

Alberch, P. (1982). Developmental constraints in evolutionary processes. In Evolution and Development, ed. Bonner, J. T., pp. 313–332. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alberch, P. (1989). The logic of monsters: evidence for internal constraint in development and evolution. Geobios, mémoire spécial, 12, 21–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alberch, P. (1991). From genes to phenotype: dynamical systems and evolvability. Genetica, 84, 5–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Alberch, P. and Gale, E. A. (1985). A developmental analysis of an evolutionary trend: digital reduction in amphibians. Evolution, 39, 8–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Alberch, P., Gould, S. J., Oster, G. F., and Wake, D. B. (1979). Size and shape in ontogeny and phylogeny. Paleobiology, 5, 296–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Antonovics, J. and Tienderen, P. H. (1991). Ontoecogenophyloconstraints? The chaos of constraint terminology. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 6, 166–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Arnold, S. J., Pfrender, M. E., and Jones, A. G. (2001). The adaptive landscape as a conceptual bridge between micro- and macroevolution. Genetica, 112–113, 9–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bambach, R. K., Knoll, A. H., and Wang, S. C. (2004). Origination, extinction, and mass depletions in marine diversity. Paleobiology, 30, 522–542.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bateson, W. (1896). Materials for the Study of Variation. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

Bayer, U. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1984). Iterative evolution of Middle Jurassic ammonite faunas. Lethaia, 17, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bayer, U. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1985). Evolution in marginal epicontinental basins: the role of phylogenetic and ecological factors (ammonite replacements in the German Lower and Middle Jurassic). In Sedimentary and Evolutionary Cycles, eds. Bayer, U. and Seilacher, A., pp. 164–220. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Berger, W. H. (1969). Planktonic foraminifera: basic morphology and ecologic implications. Journal of Paleontology, 43, 1369–1383.Google Scholar

Blomberg, S. P. and Garland, T. (2002). Tempo and mode in evolution: phylogenetic inertia, adaptation and comparative methods. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 15, 899–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bonner, J. T. (1982). Evolution and Development: Report of the Dahlem Workshop on Evolution and Development, Berlin 1981. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bookstein, F. L. (1977). The study of shape transformation after D'Arcy Thompson. Mathematical Biosciences, 43, 177–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bookstein, F. L. (1997). Morphometric Tools for Landmark Data: Geometry and Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Brasier, M. D. (1980). Microfossils. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar

Cain, A. J. (1977). Variation in the spire index of some coiled gastropod shells, and its evolutionary significance. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (B: biological sciences), 277, 377–428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Callebaut, W. and Rasskin-Gutman, D. (2005). Modularity: Understanding the Development and Evolution of Natural Complex Systems. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Cattin, M.-F., Bersier, L.-F., Banašek-Richter, C., Baltensperger, R., and Gabriel, J.-P. (2004). Phylogenetic constraints and adaptation explain food-web structure. Nature, 427, 835–839.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. (1976). Flow patterns and drag coefficients of cephalopod shells. Palaeontology, 19, 539–563.Google Scholar

Chamberlain, J. A. Jr. (1981). Hydromechanical design of fossil cephalopods. Systematics Association Special Volume, 18, 289–336.Google Scholar

Checa, A. G., Okamoto, T., and Keupp, H. (2002). Abnormalities as natural experiments: a morphologic model for coiling regulation in planispiral ammonites. Paleobiology, 28, 127–138.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cheetham, A. H. and Hayek, L. C. (1983). Geometric consequences of branching growth in adeoniform Bryozoa. Paleobiology, 9, 240–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ciampaglio, C. N. (2002). Determining the role that ecological and develop-mental constraints play in controlling disparity: examples from the crinoid and blastozoan fossil record. Evolution and Development, 4, 170–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Conway Morris, S. (1998). The Crucible of Creation: The Burgess Shale and the Rise of Animals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Conway Morris, S. (2003). Life's Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cook, T. A. (1914). The Curves of Life. London: Constable and Company.Google Scholar

Cortie, M. B. (1989). Models for mollusc shape. South African Journal of Science, 85, 454–460.Google Scholar

Cubo, J. (2004). Pattern and process in constructional morphology. Evolution and Development, 6, 131–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray.Google Scholar

Davoli, F. and Russo, F. (1974). Una metodologia paleontometrica basata sul modello di Raup:verifica sperimentale su rappresentanti follili del gen. Subula Schumacher. Bollettino della Società Paleontologica Italiana, 13, 108–121.Google Scholar

Dawkins, R. (1996). Climbing Mount Improbable. New York: W. W. Norton and Co.Google Scholar

Dennett, D. C. (1996). Darwin's Dangerous Idea. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar

Dobzhanski, T. (1970). Genetics of the Evolutionary Process. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Dommergues, J.-L., Laurin, B., and Meister, C. (1996). Evolution of ammonoid morphospace during the Early Jurassic radiation. Paleobiology, 22, 219–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eble, G. J. (2000). Theoretical morphology: state of the art. Paleobiology, 26, 520–528.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Eble, G. J. (2003). Developmental morphospaces and evolution. In Evolutionary Dynamics:Exploring the Interplay of Selection, Accident, Neutrality, and Function, eds. Crutchfield, J. P. and Schuster, P., pp. 33–63. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ellers, O. (1993). A mechanical model of growth in regular sea urchins: predictions of shape and a developmental morphospace. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B254, 123–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ellison, A. M. and Niklas, K. J. (1988). Branching patterns of Salicornia europaea (Chenopodiaceae) at different successional stages: a comparison of theoretical and real plants. American Journal of Botany, 75, 501–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ferguson, S. A. (2002). Methodology in evolutionary psychology. Biology and Philosophy, 17, 635–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fisher, R. A. (1941). Average excess and average effect of a gene substitution. Annals of Eugenics, 11, 53–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Foley, J. and Dam, A. (1982). Fundamentals of Interactive Computer Graphics. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar

Fortey, R. A. (1983). Geometric constraints in the construction of graptolite stipes. Paleobiology, 9, 116–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Funk, and Wagnall, (1963). Standard College Dictionary. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc.Google Scholar

Futuyma, D. (1998). Evolutionary Biology. Sunderland (MA): Sinauer Associates, Inc.Google Scholar

Gärdenfors, P. (2000). Conceptual Spaces: the Geometry of Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Gavrilets, S. (1997). Evolution and speciation on holey adaptive landscapes. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 12, 307–312.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gavrilets, S. (1999). A dynamical theory of speciation on holey adaptive landscapes. American Naturalist, 154, 1–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Gavrilets, S. (2003). Evolution and speciation in a hyperspace: the roles of neutrality, selection, mutation, and random drift. In Evolutionary Dynamics: Exploring the Interplay of Selection, Accident, Neutrality, and Function, eds. Crutchfield, J. P. and Schuster, P., pp. 135–162. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gavrilets, S. and Gravner, J. (1997). Percolation on the fitness hypercube and the evolution of reproductive isolation. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 184, 51–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Goodwin, B. C. (1963). Temporal Organization in Cells. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Gould, S. J. (1976). D'Arcy Thompson and the science of form. In Topics in the Philosophy of Biology, eds. Grene, M. and Mendelsohn, E., pp. 66–97. Dortrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar

Gould, S. J. (1989). Wonderful Life. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar

Gould, S. J. (1991). The disparity of the Burgess Shale arthropod fauna and the limits of cladistic analysis: why we must strive to quantify morphospace. Paleobiology, 17, 411–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gould, S. J. (1993). How to analyze Burgess Shale disparity – a reply to Ridley. Paleobiology, 19, 522–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gould, S. J. (1995). A task for paleobiology at the threshold of majority. Paleobiology, 21, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hammer, Ø. and Bucher, H. (2005). Models for the morphogenesis of the molluscan shell. Lethaia, 38, 111–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hertel, F. and Lehman, N. (1998). A randomized nearest-neighbor approach for assessment of character displacement: the vulture guild as a model. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 190, 51–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Hickman, C. S. (1993). Theoretical design space: a new paradigm for the analysis of structural diversity. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 190, 169–182.Google Scholar

Honda, H. and Fisher, J. B. (1978). Tree branch angle: maximizing effective leaf area. Science, 199, 888–890.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Hutchinson, J. M. C. (1999). But which morphospace to use?Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 14, 414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Jablonski, D. (2005). Evolutionary innovations in the fossil record: the intersection of ecology, development, and macroevolution. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B (Molecular and Developmental Evolution), 304B, 504–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kauffman, S. A. (1993). The Origins of Order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kauffman, S. A. (1995). At Home in the Universe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Keller, E. F. (2002). Making Sense of Life: Explaining Biological Development with Models, Metaphors, and Machines. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Kendrick, D. C. (2007). Theoretical morphology of crinoid calyxes. Paleobiology, in press.Google Scholar

Kershaw, S. and Riding, R. (1978). Parameterization of stromatoporoid shape. Lethaia, 11, 233–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kohn, A. J. and Riggs, A. C. (1975). Morphometry of the Conus shell. Systematic Zoology, 24, 346–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Korn, D. (2000). Morphospace occupation of ammonoids over the Devonian–Carboniferous boundary. Paläontologische Zeitschrift, 74, 247–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Kuhn-Schnyder, E. and Rieber, H. (1986). Handbook of Paleozoology. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

McCartney, K. and Loper, D. E. (1989). Optimized skeletal morphologies of silicoflagellate genera Dictyocha and Distephanus. Paleobiology, 15, 283–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McCartney, K. and Loper, D. E. (1992). Optimal models of skeletal morphology for the silicoflagellate genus Corbisema. Micropaleontology, 38, 87–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1980a). Shell form in the biconvex articulate Brachiopoda: a geometric analysis. Paleobiology, 6, 57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1980b). Shell geometry and stability strategies in the biconvex Brachiopoda. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Monatshefte, 1980(3), 155–184.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1988). The Late Devonian extinction event: evidence for abrupt ecosystem collapse. Paleobiology, 14, 250–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1991). Theoretical morphology: the concept and its applications. In Analytical Paleobiology, eds. Gilinsky, N. L. and Signor, P. W., pp. 87–102. Short Courses in Paleontology No. 4, the Paleontological Society and the Univeristy of Tennessee, Knoxville.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1995). Geometry of evolution in the biconvex Brachiopoda: morphological effects of mass extinction. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 197, 357–382.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (1999). Theoretical Morphology: the Concept and Its Applications. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2001a). Exploring the spectrum of existent, nonexistent and impossible biological form. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 16, 172–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2001b). The question of spiral axes and brachiopod shell growth: a comparison of morphometric techniques. Paleobiology, 27, 716–723.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2006). Exploring the spectrum of existent, nonexistent, and impossible biological form: a research program. In Modeling Biology: Structures, Behaviors, Evolution, eds. Laubichler, M. and G. B. Müller, pp. in press. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. and McKinney, F. K. (2000). A theoretical morphologic analysis of convergently evolved erect helical colony form in the Bryozoa. Paleobiology, 26, 556–577.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. and McKinney, F. K. (2002). A theoretical morphologic analysis of ecomorphologic variation in Archimedes helical colony form. Palaios, 17, 556–570.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr. and Starcher, R. W. (2006). Geometric models of lophophore shape and arrangement in extinct modular organisms. Journal of Paleontology, in press.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr., Bayer, U., and Seilacher, A. (1991). Biological and evolutionary responses to transgressive-regressive cycles. In Cycles and Events in Stratigraphy, eds. Einsele, G., Ricken, W., and A. Seilacher, pp. 696–708. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar

McGhee, G. R. Jr., Sheehan, P. M., Bottjer, D. J., and Droser, M. L. (2004). Ecological ranking of Phanerozoic biodiversity crises: ecological and taxonomic severities are decoupled. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 211, 289–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McGowan, A. J. (2004). The effect of the Permo-Triassic bottleneck on Triassic ammonoid morphological evolution. Paleobiology, 30, 369–395.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McHenry, M. J. and Patek, S. N. (2004). The evolution of larval morphology and swimming performance in ascidians. Evolution, 58, 1209–1224.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Mack, R. N. (2003). Phylogenetic constraint, absent life forms, and preadapted alien plants: a prescription for biological invasions. International Journal of Plant Science, 164(3 Supplement), S185–S196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McKinney, F. K. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2003). Evolution of erect helical colony form in the Bryozoa: phylogenetic, functional, and ecological factors. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 80, 360–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McKinney, F. K. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2004). Erratum: Evolution of erect helical colony form in the Bryozoa. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 81, 619–620.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McKinney, F. K. and Raup, D. M. (1982). A turn in the right direction: simulation of erect spiral growth in the bryozoans Archimedes and Bugula. Paleobiology, 8, 101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

McKitrick, M. C. (1993). Phylogenetic constraint in evolutionary theory: has it any explanatory power?Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 24, 307–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maclaurin, J. (2003). The good, the bad and the impossible. Biology and Philosophy, 18, 463–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Maynard Smith, J., Burian, R., Kauffman, S., Alberch, P., Campbell, J., Goodwin, B., Lande, R., Raup, D., and Wolpert, L. (1985). Developmental constraints and evolution. Quarterly Review of Biology, 60, 265–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Merks, R. M. H., Hoekstra, A. G., Kaandorp, J. A., Sloot, P. M. A., and Hogeweg, P. (2006). Problem-solving environments for biological morphogenesis. Computing in Science and Engineering, 8(1), 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Meyer, A. (2003). There and back again. Nature, 424, 255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Minelli, A. (2003). The Development of Animal Form: Ontogeny, Morphology, and Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Müller, G. B. and Newman, S. A. (2003). Origination of Organismal Form: Beyond the Gene in Deveopmental and Evolutionary Biology. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Müller, G. B. and Newman, S. A. (2005). The innovation triad: an evodevo agenda. Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B (Molecular and Developmental Evolution), 304B, 487–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Müller, G. B. and Wagner, G. P. (1991). Novelty in evolution: restructuring the concept. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 22, 229–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Newman, M. E. J. and Palmer, R. G. (2003). Modeling Extinction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Niklas, K. J. (1986). Computer-simulated plant evolution. Scientific American, 254 (March), 78–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Niklas, K. J. (1997a). Effects of hypothetical developmental barriers and abrupt environmental changes on adaptive walks in a computer-generated domain for early vascular land plants. Paleobiology, 23, 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Niklas, K. J. (1997b). The Evolutionary Biology of Plants. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Niklas, K. J. (2004). Computer models of early land plant evolution. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 32, 47–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Niklas, K. J. (2006). Optimization and early land plant evolution. In Modeling Biology: Structures, Behavior, Evolution, eds. Laubichler, M. and Müller, G. B., in press. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Niklas, K. J. and Kerchner, V. (1984). Mechanical and photosynthetic constraints on the evolution of plant shape. Paleobiology, 10, 79–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Okamoto, T. (1988). Analysis of heteromorph ammonoids by differential geometry. Palaeontology, 31, 35–52.Google Scholar

Olsen, E. C. and Miller, R. L. (1958). Morphological Integration. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Oster, G. F., Shubin, N., Murray, J. D., and Alberch, P. (1988). Evolution and morphogenetic rules: the shape of the vertebrate limb in ontogeny and phylogeny. Evolution, 42, 862–884.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Popov, I. Y. (2002). “Periodical systems” in biology (a historical issue). Verhandlungen zur Geschichte und Theorie der Biologie, 9, 55–68.Google Scholar

Rasskin-Gutman, D. (2003). Boundary constraints for the emergence of form. In Origination of Organismal Form: Beyond the Gene in Developmental and Evolutionary Biology, eds. Müller, G. B. and Newman, S. A., pp. 305–322. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Rasskin-Gutman, D. (2005). Modularity: jumping forms within morphospace. In Modularity: Understanding the Development and Evolution of Natural Complex Systems, eds. Callebaut, M. and Rasskin-Gutman, D., pp. 207–219. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Rasskin-Gutman, D. and Buscalioni, A. D. (2001). Theoretical morphology of the Archosaur (Reptilia: Diapsida) pelvic girdle. Paleobiology, 27, 59–78.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rasskin-Gutman, D. and Izpisúa-Belmonte, J. C. (2004). Theoretical morphology of developmental asymmetries. BioEssays, 26, 405–412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Raup, D. M. (1961). The geometry of coiling in gastropods. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (USA), 47, 602–609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Raup, D. M. (1966). Geometric analysis of shell coiling: general problems. Journal of Paleontology, 40, 1178–1190.Google Scholar

Raup, D. M. (1967). Geometric analysis of shell coiling: coiling in ammonoids. Journal of Paleontology, 41, 43–65.Google Scholar

Raup, D. M. and Michelson, A. (1965). Theoretical morphology of the coiled shell. Science, 147, 1294–1295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Raup, D. M., McGhee, G. R. Jr., and McKinney, F. K. (2006). Source code for theoretical morphologic simulation of helical colony form in the Bryozoa. Palaeontologia Electronica, 9(2); http://palaeo-electronica.org/paleo/2006_2/helical/index.html.Google Scholar

Reif, W.-E. (1980). A model of morphogenetic processes in the dermal skeleton of elasmobranchs. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 159, 339–359.Google Scholar

Rex, M. A. and Boss, K. J. (1976). Open coiling in recent gastropods. Malacologia, 15, 289–297.Google Scholar

Rice, S. H. (1997). The analysis of ontogenetic trajectories: when a change in size or shape is not heterochrony. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 94, 907–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Richtsmeier, J. T. and Lele, S. (1993). A coordinate-free approach to the analysis of growth patterns: models and theoretical considerations. Biological Reviews, 68, 381–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ridley, M. (1996). Evolution. Cambridge (MA): Blackwell Science.Google Scholar

Russell, E. S. (1916). Form and Function: a Contribution to the History of Animal Morphology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (1982 Reprint).Google Scholar

Saunders, W. B. and Swan, A. R. H. (1984). Morphology and morphologic diversity of mid-Carboniferous (Namurian) ammonoids in time and space. Paleobiology, 10, 195–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Saunders, W. B., Work, D. M., and Nikolaeva, S. V. (2004). The evolutionary history of shell geometry in Paleozoic ammonoids. Paleobiology, 30, 19–43.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Savazzi, E. (1985). SHELLGEN: A BASIC program for the modeling of molluscan shell ontogeny and morphogenesis. Computers and Geosciences, 11, 521–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Savazzi, E. (1987). Geometric and functional constraints on bivalve shell morphology. Lethaia, 20, 293–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Savazzi, E. (1990). C programs for displaying shaded three-dimensional objects on a PC. Computers and Geosciences, 16, 195–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Savazzi, E. (1993). C++ classes for theoretical shell morphology. Computers and Geosciences, 19, 931–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Schindel, D. E. (1990). Unoccupied morphospace and the coiled geometry of gastropods: architectural constraint or geometric covariation? In Causes of Evolution, eds. Ross, R. A. and Allmon, W. D., pp. 270–304. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Schwenk, K. (1995). A utilitarian approach to constraint. Zoology, 98, 251–262.Google Scholar

Signes, M., Bijma, J., Hemleben, C., and Ott, R. (1993). A model for planktic foraminiferal shell growth. Paleobiology, 19, 71–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Simpson, G. G. (1944). Tempo and Mode in Evolution. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Simpson, G. G. (1953). The Major Features of Evolution. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar

Snoad, N. and Nilsson, M. (2003). Quasispecies evolution on dynamic fitness landscapes. In Evolutionary Dynamics: Exploring the Interplay of Selection, Accident, Neutrality, and Function, eds. Crutchfield, J. P. and Schuster, P., pp. 273–289. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Solé, R. (2002). Modelling macroevolutionary patterns: an ecological perspective. In Biological Evolution and Statistical Physics, eds. Lässig, M. and Valleriani, A., pp. 312–337. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Solé, R. and Goodwin, B. (2000). Signs of Life: How Complexity Pervades Biology. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Stadler, P. F. (2002). Fitness landscapes. In Biological Evolution and Statistical Physics, eds. Lässig, M. and Valleriani, A., pp. 183–204. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stadler, B. M. R. and Stadler, P. F. (2004). The topology of evolutionary biology. In Modeling in Molecular Biology, eds. Ciobanu, G. and Rozenberg, G., pp. 267–286. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stadler, B. M. R., Stadler, P. F., Wagner, G. P., and Fontana, W. (2001). The topology of the possible: formal spaces underlying patterns of evolutionary change. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 213, 241–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Starcher, R. W. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2000). Fenestrate theoretical morphology: geometric constraints on lophophore shape and arrangement in extinct Bryozoa. Paleobiology, 26, 116–136.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Starcher, R. W. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2002). Theoretical morphology of modular organisms: geometric constraints of branch and dissepiment width and spacing in fenestrate bryozoans. Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 223, 79–122.Google Scholar

Starcher, R. W. and McGhee, G. R. Jr. (2003). Fenestrate graptolite theoretical morphology: geometric constraints on lophophore shape and arrangement in extinct hemichordates. Journal of Paleontology, 77, 360–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stone, J. R. (1996). Computer simulated shell shape and size variation in the Caribbean land snail genus Cerion: a test of geometrical constraints. Evolution, 50, 341–347.Google ScholarPubMed

Stone, J. R. (1998). Ontogenic tracks and evolutionary vestiges in morphospace. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 64, 223–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stone, J. R. (1999). Using a mathematical model to test the null hypothesis of optimal shell construction by four marine gastropods. Marine Biology, 134, 397–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Stone, J. R. (2002). Delayed prezygotic isolating mechanisms: evolution with a twist. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 269, 861–865.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Stone, J. R. (2004). Nonoptimal shell forms as overlapping points in functional and theoretical morphospaces. American Malacological Bulletin, 18, 129–134.Google Scholar

Strathmann, R. R. (1978). Progressive vacating of adaptive types during the Phanerozoic. Evolution, 32, 907–914.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Streidter, G. F. (2003). Epigenesis and evolution of brains: from embryonic divisions to functional systems. In Origination of Organismal Form: Beyond the Gene in Developmental and Evolutionary Biology, eds. Müller, G. B. and Newman, S. A., pp. 287–303. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Swan, A. R. H. (1990). A computer simulation of evolution by natural selection. Journal of the Geological Society of London, 147, 223–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Swan, A. R. H. (1999). Computer models of fossil morphology. In Numerical Palaeobiology, ed. Harper, D. A. T., pp. 157–179. London: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.Google Scholar

Swan, A. R. H. and Kershaw, S. (1994). A computer model for skeletal growth of stromatoporoids. Palaeontology, 37, 409–423.Google Scholar

Thom, R. (1975). Structural Stability and Morphogenesis: an Outline of a General Theory of Models. Reading, MA: W. A. Benjamin, Inc.Google Scholar

Thomas, R. D. K. (2005). Hierarchial integration of modular structures in the evolution of animal skeletons. In Modularity: Understanding the Development and Evolution of Natural Complex Systems, eds. Callebaut, M. and Rasskin-Gutman, D., pp. 239–258. Cambridge (MA): Vienna Series in Theoretical Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar

Thomas, R. D. K. and Reif, W.-E. (1993). The skeleton space: a finite set of organic designs. Evolution, 47, 341–360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Thomas, R. D. K., Shearman, R. M., and Stewart, G. W. (2000). Evolutionary exploitation of design options by the first animals with hard skeletons. Science, 288, 1239–1242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Thompson, D'A. W. (1917). On Growth and Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Thompson, D'A. W. (1942). On Growth and Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Tyszka, J. (2006). Morphospace of foraminiferal shells: results from the moving reference model. Lethaia, 39, 1–12.Google Scholar

Tyszka, J. and Topa, P. (2005). A new approach to modeling of foraminiferal shells. Paleobiology, 31, 522–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ubukata, T. (2000). Theoretical morphology of hinge and shell form in Bivalvia: geometric constraints derived from space conflict between umbones. Paleobiology, 26, 606–624.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ubukata, T. (2001). Stacking increments: a new model and morphospace for the analysis of bivalve shell growth. Historical Biology, 15, 303–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ubukata, T. (2003a). A theoretical morphologic analysis of bivalve ligaments. Paleobiology, 29, 369–380.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ubukata, T. (2003b). Pattern of growth rate around aperture and shell form in Bivalvia: a theoretical morphological study. Paleobiology, 29, 480–491.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ubukata, T. (2005). Theoretical morphology of bivalve shell sculptures. Paleobiology, 31, 643–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Valen, L. (1973). A new evolutionary theory. Evolutionary Theory, 1, 1–30.Google Scholar

Valkenburgh, B. (1985). Locomotor diversity within past and present guilds of large predatory mammals. Paleobiology, 11, 406–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Valkenburgh, B. (1988). Trophic diversity in past and present guilds of large predatory mammals. Paleobiology, 14, 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Waddington, C. H. (1957). The Strategy of the Genes: a Discussion of some Aspects of Theoretical Biology. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar

Waddington, C. H. (1975). The Evolution of an Evolutionist. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Wagner, G. P. (2001). What is the promise of developmental evolution? Part II: A causal explanation of evolutionary innovations may be impossible. Journal of Experimental Zoology, 291, 305–309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wagner, G. P. and Altenberg, L. (1996). Complex adaptations and the evolution of evolvability. Evolution, 50, 967–976.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ward, P. (1980). Comparative shell shape distributions in Jurassic–Cretaceous ammonites and Jurassic-Tertiary nautilids. Paleobiology, 6, 32–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Waters, J. A. (1977). Quantification of shape by use of Fourier analysis: the Mississippian blastoid genus Pentremites. Paleobiology, 3, 288–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Williamson, P. G. (1981). Palaeontological documentation of speciation in Cenozoic molluscs from Turkana Basin. Nature, 293, 437–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wilson, E. O. and Bossert, W. H. (1971). A Primer of Population Biology. Sunderland: Sinauer.Google Scholar

Wolfram, S. (2002). A New Kind of Science. Champaign, IL: Wolfram Media, Inc.Google Scholar

Wray, G. A. (2002). Do convergent developmental mechanisms underlie convergent phenotypes?Brain, Behavior and Evolution, 59, 327–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Wright, S. (1932). The roles of mutation, inbreeding, crossbreeding and selection in evolution. Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Genetics, 1, 356–366.Google Scholar

Zwieniecki, M. A., Boyce, C. K., and Holbrook, N. M. (2004). Functional design space of single-veined leaves: role of tissue hydraulic properties in constraining leaf size and shape. Annals of Botany, 94, 507–513.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed