Antisymmetry

Abstract: Part 1: introduction deriving X-bar theory. Part 2: adjunction world order further consequences. Part 3: coordination complementation relatives and possessives extraposition. Part 4: conclusion.

Abstract: Preface 1. Principles and parameters 2. Categories and features 3. Syntactic structure 4. Empty categories 5. Checking 6. Head movement 7. Operator movement 8. A movement 9. VP shells 10. Agreement projections Glossary and list of abbreviations References Index.

Abstract: Fluctuating asymmetry is the most commonly used measure of developmental instability. Some authors have claimed that antisymmetry and directional asymmetry may have a significant genetic basis, thereby rendering these forms of asymmetry useless for studies of developmental instability. Using a modified Rashevsky-Turing reaction-diffusion model of morphogenesis, we show that both antisymmetry and directional asymmetry can arise from symmetry-breaking phase transitions. Concentrations of morphogen on right and left sides can be induced to undergo transitions from phase-locked periodicity, to phase-lagged periodicity, to chaos, by simply changing the levels of feedback and inhibition in the model. The chaotic attractor has two basins of attraction-right sidedominance and left side dominance. With minor disturbance, a developmental trajectory settles into one basin or the other. With increasing disturbance, the trajectory can jump from basin to basin. The changes that lead to phase transitions and chaos are thoseexpected to occur with either genetic change or stress. If we assume that the morphogen influences the behavior of cell populations, then a transition from phase-locked periodicity to chaos in the morphogen produces a corresponding transition from fluctuating asymmetry to antisymmetry in both morphogen concentrations and cell populations. Directional asymmetry is easily modeled by introducing a bias in the conditions of the simulation. We discuss the implications of this model for researchers using fluctuating asymmetry as an indicator of stress.

Abstract: A construction is given of an equivalent one-body pocomplex target. The case of incident and target particles being identical nonrelativistic fermions, and allowing fully for antisymmetry, is considered explicitly. (A.C.)

Abstract: Phylogenetic analyses of asymmetry variation offer a powerful tool for exploring the interplay between ontogeny and evolution because (i) conspicuous asymmetries exist in many higher metazoans with widely varying modes of development, (ii) patterns of bilateral variation within species may identify genetically and environmentally triggered asymmetries, and (iii) asymmetries arising at different times during development may be more sensitive to internal cytoplasmic inhomogeneities compared to external environmental stimuli. Using four broadly comparable asymmetry states (symmetry, antisymmetry, dextral, and sinistral), and two stages at which asymmetry appears developmentally (larval and postlarval), I evaluated relations between ontogenetic and phylogenetic patterns of asymmetry variation. Among 140 inferred phylogenetic transitions between asymmetry states, recorded from 11 classes in five phyla, directional asymmetry (dextral or sinistral) evolved directly from symmetrical ancestors proportionally more frequently among larval asymmetries. In contrast, antisymmetry, either as an end state or as a transitional stage preceding directional asymmetry, was confined primarily to postlarval asymmetries. The ontogenetic origin of asymmetry thus significantly influences its subsequent evolution. Furthermore, because antisymmetry typically signals an environmentally triggered asymmetry, the phylogenetic transition from antisymmetry to directional asymmetry suggests that many cases of laterally fixed asymmetries evolved via genetic assimilation.