Administrative Agencies: A Comparison of New Hampshire and Federal Agencies’ History, Structure and Rulemaking Requirements

[Excerpt] In this day and age it is difficult to think of anything that is not regulated in some way by a state or federal agency. State and federal agencies routinely make decisions that impact our daily lives. The air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat, the clothes we wear, and the places where we live and work are all regulated to some extent. Agencies sometimes regulate things in ways that lead to strange results. For example, New Hampshire, state regulations allow anyone to own a yak, a bison, a wild boar, or an emu, but do not permit a person to own a capuchin monkey unless that person is an “exhibitor” of animals. This may not seem like a big deal, but the result of this restriction is that people with disabilities cannot possess a capuchin monkey as a service animal unless they qualify as an “exhibitor.” Most people with disabilities that need a capuchin monkey as a service animal will not meet the “exhibitor” requirements. They don’t intend to exhibit the animal; they just need the animal to help them with daily activities. Therefore, the result of the agency’s rules is that people in New Hampshire are able to possess yaks or wild boar with little or no agency oversight, but cannot possess an animal that will bring great benefit to their daily lives. This article discusses where New Hampshire and federal agencies obtain the authority to make agency rules or regulations, and the similarities and differences in the way they make them. This article also compares the way that New Hampshire and federal agencies are structured and controlled by the executive and legislative branches of government

Genes Classical And Genes Developmental: The Different Uses Of The Gene In Evolutionary Synthesis

Dobzhansky (1964) stated that “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution,” and the function of the gene is no exception. The use of genes in population genetics and developmental genetics differs significantly. This is reflected in the roles that genes are postulated to play in evolution. In the Modern Synthesis of population genetics and evolution, genes become manifest by differences in alleles that are active in conferring differential reproductive success in adult individuals. The gene is thought to act as a particulate, atomic unit. In current syntheses of evolution and developmental genetics, important genes are manifest by their similarities across distantly related phyla, and they are active in the construction of embryos. These developmental genes are thought to act in a contextdependent network. In the population genetics model of evolution, mutations in genes provide insights into the mechanisms for natural selection and microevolution. Different individuals will be selected and their genes will be represented in higher proportions in the next generation. For the developmental geneticist, mutations in the genes provide insights into the mechanisms of phylogeny and macroevolution. Different modes of regulation may enable the production of new types of structures or the modification of existing ones. The importance of developmental approaches to the role of genes is exemplified by the discovery and subsequent analysis of the developmental gene MyoD. The concept of the gene has had its own radiation once it entered into the territory of developmental biology

Paradigm Shifts In Neural Induction

The molecularization of developmental biology was originally seen as a challenge to the integrity of that discipline. However, important new insights from the analysis of gene expression soon transformed the field from one of experimental anatomy to one of developmental genetics. One of the main areas to be transformed from an anatomical to a molecular study was « primary embryonic induction ». The molecular analyses showed that some of the fundamental concepts concluded from the experimental embryological approach to primary embryonic induction were false. First, the neural fate of cells was not being induced. Rather, the epidermal fate was induced and the neural state was the default, uninduced, fate of ectodermal tissues. Second, primary embryonic induction was not something unique to vertebrates. Rather, the ventral neural cord of insects formed using the same mechanisms as the dorsal neural tube of vertebrates. Third, the brain formed in a matter distinctly different from that of the spinal cord. Despite these differences, there has been a clear and strong continuity between the experimental embryological tradition and the molecular genetic tradition, and these new results are seen by many contemporary developmental geneticists as strengthening, rather than destroying, the older science

The Morphogenesis Of Evolutionary Developmental Biology

The early studies of evolutionary developmental biology (Evo-Devo) come from several sources. Tributaries flowing into Evo-Devo came from such disciplines as embryology, developmental genetics, evolutionary biology, ecology, paleontology, systematics, medical embryology and mathematical modeling. This essay will trace one of the major pathways, that from evolutionary embryology to Evo-Devo and it will show the interactions of this pathway with two other sources of Evo-Devo: ecological developmental biology and medical developmental biology. Together, these three fields are forming a more inclusive evolutionary developmental biology that is revitalizing and providing answers to old and important questions involving the formation of biodiversity on Earth. The phenotype of Evo-Devo is limited by internal constraints on what could be known given the methods and equipment of the time and it has been framed by external factors that include both academic and global politics