4.6 Article

Faraway, so close. The comparative method and the potential of non-model animals in mitochondrial research

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2019.0186

关键词

comparative biology; non-model organisms; mitochondria; generalization; idiographics; nomothetics

类别

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR) SIR Programme [RBSI14G0P5]
  2. MIUR FIR2013 Programme [RBFR13T97A]
  3. Canziani bequest
  4. 'Ricerca Fondamentale Orientata' (RFO) from the University of Bologna

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inference from model organisms has been the engine for many discoveries in life science, but indiscriminate generalization leads to oversimplifications and misconceptions. Model organisms and inductive reasoning are irreplaceable: there is no other way to tackle the complexity of living systems. At the same time, it is not advisable to infer general patterns from a restricted number of species, which are very far from being representative of the diversity of life. Not all models are equal. Some organisms are suitable to find similarities across species, other highly specialized organisms can be used to focus on differences. In this opinion piece, we discuss the dominance of the mechanistic/reductionist approach in life sciences and make a case for an enhanced application of the comparative approach to study processes in all their various forms across different organisms. We also enlist some rising animal models in mitochondrial research, to exemplify how non-model organisms can be chosen in a comparative framework. These taxa often do not possess implemented tools and dedicated methods/resources. However, because of specific features, they have the potential to address still unanswered biological questions. Finally, we discuss future perspectives and caveats of the comparative method in the age of 'big data'. This article is part of the theme issue 'Linking the mitochondrial genotype to phenotype: a complex endeavour'.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据