what is the unifying theory of biology?
477695
The unifying theory within biology is considered by most to be the theory of evolution, in reality there are several theories that can be considered unifying: the cell theory, the theory of evolution, gene theory, and the theory of homeostasis.\n\nIf this is for homework, I would guess that your teacher or whoever created the worksheet you're doing for homework is looking for the theory of evolution.
927665
atom, molecule, cell, tissue, organ, organ system, and organism\n\nThe rest is a grand surprise that only the elite few can figure out.\n\nDon't hurt yourself with the pages of your Bio book.
36912
Cell theory history\nIn 1838, the botanist Matthias Jakob Schleiden and Theodor Schwann, a physiologist discovered that both plant and animal cells had nuclei. From this realization, they surmised that all living things were composed of cells. In 1839, Schwann published 'Microscopic Investigations on the Accordance in the Structure and Growth of Plants and Animals', which contained the first statement of the cell theory.\n\nSchwann and Schleiden's statement of the cell theory was:\n\nCells are the unit of structure, physiology, and organization in living things. \nCells are both a distinct entity and a building block in the construction of organisms. \nCells form by spontaneous generation.
310797
Evolution is a theory developed by Charles Darwin to explain the creation of life. \n\nHe believed that man originated from a single-celled organism that combined with another single-celled organism to create the first dual-celled organism.
218904
As jorganos said correctly, evolution is the only theory capable of explaining the enormous amount of facts that we know about all forms of life (from plants to ourselves), at all times (from fossils to today's species), and at all scales (from DNA to ecosystems).\nThe evolution theory is accepted by any qualified scientist, and questioned only outside the scientific community, mainly for religious or political purposes.
46050
That is a very cool question. Biology is the study of life. Not just squids and kangaroos but you and the foods you eat.\n\nHey I love food, and air and water, without them none of us would be here! They are essential.\n\nBiology helps us understand where our essentials come from. For instance, a small change in an ecosystem could radically effect farmer's ability to grow plants and raise animals we depend on to live. In the 1930's the Dustbowl wiped out farms across a wide area!\n\nAlso many plants and animals produce complex chemicals which we use in everyday medicine. Aspirin for instance is derived from the willow tree. Antibiotics like Penicillin were discovered in spores of mold.
264396
Great stuff going on right now having to do with developmental genes (like Hox genes).  You may know this as "Evo Devo" or evolutionary developmental biology.\n\nCheck out the book "Endless Forms Most Beautiful," by Sean Carroll.  He also gives ideas for research and new fields, lots of peer-reviewed papers.\n\nI just read it this Fall, it was great.
519097
Biology has traditionally consisted of botany, zoology and microbiology.  Chemistry has consisted mainly of physical, organic, analytical and biochemistry.  Until relatively recently those divisions have held up reasonably well.  Now there is a whole new world of chemical and physical biology and biochemistry and biophysics.  To throw all of biology and chemistry into biochemistry would be a misnomer for many of the parts of both.  To add biochemistry or chemical biology into one pot might be a good idea to catch the questions in the area betwen
373493
1. Genetic analysis shows similarities among species reflecting evolutionary origins.\n\nThe main point here is that recent work has shown that the extent of genetic divergence among species is consistent with the expected separation based on the fossil record and morphological evidence. This supports the conclusions drawn from the other evidence.\n\nGenetic analysis often reveals remnants of a gene that is functional in one species but not another (i.e. a mutation occurred that made the gene non-functional, but most of the sequence is still intact). Why would God have created non-functional sequences that are extremely similar to functional genes found in related species?\n\nAlso, non-coding regions of DNA show degrees of similarity that are consistent with the expected degree of evolutionary divergence. I understand how you could argue that God was essentially working form a common genetic template for all species, but why change the non-coding regions? These differences result from mutations that do not affect the phenotype of the species in any way but accumulate over time. Non-coding regions show sequences that are conserved with changes, and the number of changes is consistent with the number of mutations that would be expected to have occurred since the approximate time of existence of most recent common ancestor.\n\n2. Many cellular and biochemical processes are conserved in a variety of species.\n\nThe point here is that virtually all cells utilize similar mechanisms of DNA replication and protein synthesis, share certain respiration pathways, and other biochemical processes. Related species show more similarities. For example, all plants are capable of photosynthesis, and utilize a virtually identical biochemical pathway to accomplish this. If you study cell biology you will find numerous examples of pathways that are common to different types of cells. I'm not going to go into this more here as it requires considerable background in cell biology. However, these biochemical similarities support they theory that all cells share a common ancestor.\n\n3. Vestigial biochemical pathways (for example, pancreatic cells are light-sensitive even though they are located deep inside the body).\n\nThese are similar to vestigial structures at the cellular level. The specific example I mentioned is the light-sensitive behavior of pancreatic cells. Basically, the pancreas is located inside the body and will never be exposed to light. However, pancreatic cells grown in vitro (i.e. in a Petri dish, test tube, etc.) demonstrate light-sensitive activation of biochemical pathways similar to that seen in the cells that form the retina. There is no reason for this behavior unless this pathway is a remnant (i.e. a vestigial pathway) of a pathway present in an ancestral cell that did have come in contact with light.\n\nThere are many other examples of vestigial biochemical pathways. Like vestigial structures, their existence is easily explained by evolution but makes no sense in the context of creationism or "intelligent design."
328557
"Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny."\n\nWhich is a fancy way of saying that the stages an organism goes through during gestation (pre-birth) mirror (to some extent) its evolutionary history.  There are stages when even a human fetus resembles more a fish or an amphibian than a mammal, and we all start out as a single-celled organism.\n\nMost species' evolutionary history is educated guesswork based on similar anatomical and physiological structures, compared with both existing organisms and those in the fossil record.  Also, DNA similarities indicate evolutionary proximity -- for example, aside from the fact that all primates look similar (similar anatomical structure) our DNA is closer to that of certain monkeys than any other species.  This strongly suggests that somewhere back in history we had a common ancestor.\n\nBy the way, anyone who discards the theory of evolution because it's "not proven" doesn't know the first thing of how science works and, to be honest, should be ignored.
49268
I think more than any other thing--more than all other things combined, perhaps--there is a single, most important fundamental that must be understood: The Law of Mass Action.  The barrier to understanding evolution stems from the word "random."  We hear "random," and the instinct is to say, "Bull pucky."  But randomness, applied to the law of mass action, becomes every driving force in the universe, and the origin of all order.\n\nThis is a ubiquitous law in nature.  The hardest part of understanding something like evolution is trying to wrap your mind around the NUMBERS.  Those huge, infinitely-large number that are used to discuss propability are truly mind-boggling.  Once you realize that there are other examples of driving forces overcoming immense odds, your whole perspective on the probability of evolution changes.\n\nTake biochemistry.  This is some stuff that's completely undisputed.  A protein starts as a chain--or several chains--of amino acids, all strung together.  Miraculously, this protein folds into the specific conformation necessary to perform its function by the simple process of RANDONLY banging around.  That's it!  It just bangs this way and that, folds left and right, over and under, driven by nothing more than the RANDOM bumping and shifting caused by thermal energy bumping tiny articles against eachother.\n\nBUT!!!  Once it gets to a thermodynamically-stable conformation, it basically stays put.  It takes a million random bumps left and right, up and down, for each of the two joints connecting every individual amino acid on the thread, but once it goes the right way, it's mission is accomplished.  And all of this happens in the blink of an eye!  We have no concept of how incredibly quickly these minor bumps and bangs occur until the target reaches its mark.\n\nOr take diffusion.  This is an extrodinarily powerful driving force, and the law that governs it is so simple that it sounds absurd!  Here it goes:  It is more probable that something will go from where it is to where it isn't, than it is for something to go from where it isn't to where it is.  Done!  That's it.  I've just told you in a tiny nutshell what chemical engineers spend two years studying with differntial equations, labs, and computer models.  That's thermostatistics summed up.  And yet because I understood that very basic fact, I was able to understand the complex functions of the nerve cell far better than 99% of my molecular biology classmates.\n\nBear with me a bit longer: when a neuron fires, ions rush in and out of the cell in ways that depolarize and repolarize the electrical charge of the membrane.  It's really complicated-sounding stuff.  But what it really boils down to is that potassium ions (K) are concentrated in one place (mostly inside the cell), and sodium ions (Na) are concentrated somewhere else (mostly outside the cell).  All of these ions are banging around, this way and that.  Some go left, and some go right, but the membrane staps them from going through.  The special channels open up.  Na ions, being mostly outside the cell, will be far more likely to go inside the cell--where they aren't--than they are to come out of the cell--where they already are.  THat's all it is--you're more likely to go from where you already are to where you aren't than vice-versa.  It's so simple it stupid.  Yet the movement of any GIVEN ION is COMPLETELY RANDOM--and yet this action happens so quickly and so consistently and so reliably that this become the driving mechanism of all biological activity.  This random ion movement, taken applied to a massive system where thermal bumping happens millions of times per second for biliions of billions of ions happens in a reliable and concerted way every time you blink.  Every pixel you see on your screen right now is the product where trillions of random molecular collisions happened, but a handful of signific
941577
Hi Naveen,\nThat question is interesting, and requires some basic knowledge of evolutionary genetics to answer.\nI shall try  to make this simple:\n\nThe basic unit of life according to the latest views, is the gene. This is bcoz Gene or the genetic material, whether it be RNA or DNA or any other non carbon material for that matter,is the one that posess the most funbamental quality of life- that is to "make a replica of itself and thereby immortalise its own kind" . \nEarlier, the ability to respire, the ability to grow in size, the ability to store and handle or transform energy and the ability to interact with the environment were all considered as basic and essential qualities of life. Now the view has changed and what i mentioned earlier holds true.\n        The genetic material as i told you has only one "aim"and that is procreation! All the interactions we see among living organisms around us is a result of the Genetic Material(gene) trying to create a copy of it successfully and make it survive.  "The cell is a way of the gene to make another gene" as Richard Dawkins told once. And when the cell becomes useless on its own to help genes procreate, the gene finds ways to make cells co-operate. Thats how multicellular organisms evolved. \n\nThis evolution was very very gradual, i need not stress upon that part. In this view of the living world, Animals, or for that matter Humans are the pinnacle of the gene's experiment for cooperation! Not only does each cell in an animal body work in close harmony with its neighbours, the organism(animal or human) as a whole works and lives in total harmony with others of the same group.\n         The mechanism of this cooperation is seen in pack-hunting strategies of many social animals like jackal, hyenas, wolves, lions, or the colony of ants , termites ,bees or wasps, or the farmlands of humans or in a modern factory..! This genetic cooperation has evolved innumerable mechanisms to identify common goals, common genetic makeup, and common ideology. This is why in a country, people of the same religion/ political ideology unite for common purposes.This is why,people of the same state unite in the name of language; people of same district unite in the name of region; people of same family unite in the name of blood relation ;brothers or sisters unite in the name of common genes, and finally an individual himself or herself becomes selfish when it comes to his/ her bodily demands...! \n         How does the one gene identify the presence of another of its own kind in another individual? This is called  "green beard effect"..! The concept is simple: A gene has two functions in the body: the first is its true function- to synthesize some protein that the body needs. The second function is that the gene produces some visible character in the body of the individual so that another individual can identify this character and extend its cooperation. A gene can thus make a person's mind more inclined to accept religion as a way of brotherhood/cooperation \n (like we see in some terrorist and racist groups) or it can simply tell the individual to cooperate for food. \n       The lowest level of this sort of cooperation is seen in symbiotic and parasitic relationships in animal or plant or even microscopic world of unicellular organisms. Bacteria live in our gut and help us digest cellulose from veg-food, we provide them a congenial environment to survive and reproduce. This is symbiosis. Parasites usually harm the host and eventually destroy them.Eg: fungi. \nTherefore all life forms on earth have likings for some or the other kind of organism. In social animals, the liking is towards individuals of the same species. In other groups, it may be towards a parasite or a symbiont. Some plants in the amazon provide "food" for ants that colonize among their roots, and in turn the ants provide protection to these plants from external animals. Som
990546
Biological science is the branch of science dealing with the study of life. It is concerned with the characteristics, classification, and behaviors of organisms, how species come into existence, and the interactions they have with each other and with the environment. Biology encompasses a broad spectrum of academic fields that are often viewed as independent disciplines. However, together they address phenomena related to living organisms (biological phenomena) over a wide range of scales, from biochemistry to ecology.\n\nAt the organism level, biology has explained phenomena such as birth, growth, aging, death and decay of living organisms, similarities between offspring and their parents (heredity) and flowering of plants which have puzzled humanity throughout history. Other phenomena, such as lactation, metamorphosis, egg-hatching, healing, and tropism have been addressed. On a wider scale of time and space, biologists have studied domestication of animals and plants, the wide variety of living organisms (biodiversity), changes in living organisms over time (evolution), extinction, speciation, social behaviour among animals, etc.
582363
The cell is the structural and functional unit of all living organisms, and is sometimes called the "building block of life." Some organisms, such as bacteria, are unicellular, consisting of a single cell. Other organisms, such as humans, are multicellular, (humans have an estimated 100 trillion or 1014 cells; a typical cell size is 10 µm, a typical cell mass 1 nanogram).\n\nThe cell theory, first developed in 1839 by Schleiden and Schwann, states that all organisms are composed of one or more cells; all cells come from preexisting cells; all vital functions of an organism occur within cells, and cells contain the hereditary information necessary for regulating cell functions and for transmitting information to the next generation of cells.
659714
systems theory is an interdisciplinary field which studies relationships among the systems as a whole.a system is composed of regularly interacting or interdependent groups .
1135493
Biology has become such a vast research enterprise that it is not generally regarded as a single discipline, but as a number of clustered sub-disciplines. This article considers four broad groupings. The first group consists of those disciplines that study the basic structures of living systems: cells, genes etc.; the second group considers the operation of these structures at the level of tissues, organs, and bodies; the third group considers organisms and their histories; the final constellation of disciplines focuses on their interactions. It is important to note, however, that these boundaries, groupings, and descriptions are a simplified characterization of biological research. In reality, the boundaries between disciplines are fluid, and most disciplines frequently borrow techniques from each other. For example, evolutionary biology leans heavily on techniques from molecular biology to determine DNA sequences, which assist in understanding the genetic variation of a population; and physiology borrows extensively from cell biology in describing the function of organ systems.
1024031
Umm, no, I think that evolution is a theory, whereas molecular biology is a branch of science.  And molecular biology was most certainly NOT derived by Darwin.  He hadn't the tools, you see.  So, no to everything you said.  And I didn't understand what you meant by mixing up.  Do you mean using?  In which case, no, microbiology isn't being used to prove a theory, that's not how science works.  It's being used to observe the world and make predictions.  That's why it's science.\nAnd, instead of physics, why don't you ask in biology?  I think you might get better answers about evolution there.  Just a tip.  If you want to ask in physics, go ahead.  I'm just sayin'