The genotype–phenotype distinction: from Mendelian genetics to 21st century biology

Abstract

The Genotype-Phenotype (G-P) distinction was proposed in the context of Mendelian genetics, in the wake of late 19th century studies about heredity. In this paper, we provide a conceptual analysis that highlights that the G-P distinction was grounded on three pillars: observability, transmissibility, and causality. Originally, the genotype is the non-observable and transmissible cause of the phenotype, which is its observable and non-transmissible effect. We argue that the current developments of biology have called the validity of such pillars into question. First, molecular biology has unveiled the putative material substrate of the genotype (qua DNA), making it an observable object. Second, numerous findings on nongenetic heredity suggest that some phenotypic traits can be directly transmitted. Third, recent organicist approaches to biological phenomena have emphasized the reciprocal causality between parts of a biological system, which notably applies to the relations between genotypes and phenotypes. As a consequence, we submit that the G-P distinction has lost its general validity, although it can still apply to specific situations. This calls for forging new frameworks and concepts to better describe heredity and development.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

    This entry is not archived by us. If you are the author and have permission from the publisher, we recommend that you archive it. Many publishers automatically grant permission to authors to archive pre-prints. By uploading a copy of your work, you will enable us to better index it, making it easier to find.

    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 104,583

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

The Phenotype/Genotype Distinction and the Disappearance of the Body.Gabriel Gudding - 1996 - Journal of the History of Ideas 57 (3):525-545.
Gene expression and the concept of the phenotype.Ohad Nachtomy, Ayelet Shavit & Zohar Yakhini - 2007 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 38 (1):238-254.
Relations among fields: Mendelian, cytological and molecular mechanisms.Lindley Darden - 2005 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 36 (2):349-371.
The genotype/phenotype distinction.Richard Lewontin - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Genotype–phenotype mapping and the end of the ‘genes as blueprint’ metaphor.Massimo Pigliucci - 2010 - Philosophical Transactions Royal Society B 365:557–566.
Beyond Mendelism and Biometry.Yafeng Shan - 2021 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 89 (C):155-163.
Sources of Wilhelm Johannsen’s Genotype Theory.Nils Roll-Hansen - 2009 - Journal of the History of Biology 42 (3):457-493.
Phenotype-genotype dichotomy: an essay in theoretical biology.Piotr Lenartowicz - 1975 - Roma: Typis Pontificiae Universitatis Gregorianae.
Heredity and Heritability.Richard C. Lewontin - 2008 - In Sahorta Sarkar & Anya Plutynski, Companion to the Philosophy of Biology. Blackwell. pp. 40–57.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-03-25

Downloads
31 (#803,759)

6 months
3 (#1,177,648)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Matteo Mossio
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

Citations of this work

Jacob’s Understanding of Reproduction: Challenges from an Organismic Collaborative Framework.Arantza Etxeberria Agiriano - 2023 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 13 (2):535-553.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references