Evolution of Modern Zoology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59992/IJSR.2023.v2n11p7الكلمات المفتاحية:
Zoology، Electron Microscope، Biological Discoveries، Oscilloscopes Binary Isotopes، Radiometry، Digital Photography، Satellite Images، PCR، DNA، GPS Systems، Computers، Animal Behaviour، Primitive and Hybrid Species، Parthenogenetic Formsالملخص
Technology has contributed to the development of zoology, and the electron microscope has played an important role in many biological discoveries, as have oscilloscopes Binary isotopes, radiometry, digital photography and satellite images, PCR and DNA, and GPS systems, computers, and many of the technologies that worked on Progress in research fields in various branches of zoology has even contributed to finding solutions to some of the problems facing the environment in order to develop terrestrial and marine resources and preserve biodiversity It was the discovery and identification of Mendelian genetics, the structure of DNA, the code, instinct and animal behaviour Primitive and hybrid species, parthenogenetic forms of life, and new, previously unknown kingdoms of chemomorphology all had a positive impact on the development of zoology This paper discusses the development of zoology in the modern era. What distinguishes zoology is its impact on environmental balance and diversity preservation issues Organisms, ranging from restriction enzymes, the discovery of cloning, genetic engineering, and genetic control of decomposition states. Understanding metabolic pathways supports the need to address these topics with careful review, as we will see in this paper.
المراجع
1. ANDERSSON M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton University Press.
2. V. de Boer, J. Wielemaker, J. van Gent, M. Oosterbroek, M. Hildebrand, A. Isaac,
1. J. van Ossenbruggen, and G. Schreiber. Amsterdam Museum Linked Open Data. Semantic Web, 4 (3), 2013.
2. C. Dijkshoorn, L. Aroyo, G. Schreiber, J. Wielemaker, and L. Jongma. Using Linked Data to Diversify Search Results: a Case Study in Cultural Heritage. In 19th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management, EKAW 2014, Link¨oping, Sweden, 2014.
3. T. Elliott and S. Gillies. Digital geography and classics. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 3(1), 2009.
4. M. Hildebrand. Interactive Exploration of Heterogeneous Cultural Heritage Collections. In 7th International Semantic Web Conference, ISWC 2008, Karlsruhe, Germany, 2008.
5. L. Isaksen, R. Simon, E. T. E. Barker, and P. de Soto Ca˜namares. Pelagios and the emerging graph of ancient world data. In ACM Web Science Conference, WebSci’14, Bloomington, IN, USA, pages 197–201. ACM, 2014.
6. M. Jackson, M. Antonioletti, A. C. Hume, T. Blanke, G. Bodard, M. Hedges, and S. Rajbhandari. Building bridges between islands of data - an investigation into distributed data management in the humanities. In Fifth International Conference on e-Science, e-Science 2009, Oxford, UK, pages 33–39. IEEE Computer Society, 2009.
7. G. Schreiber, A. K. Amin, L. Aroyo, M. van Assem, V. de Boer, L. Hardman, M. Hildebrand, B. Omelayenko, J. van Ossenbruggen, A. Tordai, J. Wielemaker, and B. J. Wielinga. Semantic Annotation and Search of Cultural-Heritage Collections: The MultimediaN E-Culture Demonstrator. J. Web Sem., 6 (4), 2008.
8. ORIANS G.H. 1980. Micro and macro in ecological theory. BioScience 30: 79.
9. PIANKA E.R. 1992. The State of the Art in Community Ecology. In Adler K. (ed.), Herpetology. Current Research on the Biology of Amphibians and Reptiles. Proceedings of the First World Con-gress of Herpetology at Canterbury. Contributions to Herpetology, Number 9, pp. 141-162.
10. ROLSTON H. 1985. Duties to endangered species. BioScience 35: 718-726.
11. VINSON J. & J.-M. VINSON. 1969. The saurian fauna of the Mascarene Islands. Mauritius Inst. Bull. 6: 203-320.
