In 1830, a dispute erupted in the halls of lÕAcad mie des Sciences in Paris between the two most prominent anatomists of the nineteenth century. Georges Cuvier and tienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, once friends and colleagues at the Paris Museum, became arch rivals after this historical episode. Like many important disputes in the history of science, this debate echoes several points of contrasts between the two thinkers. The two French Ânaturalists not only disagreed about what sorts of comparisons between vertebrates were acceptable, but also about which principles ought to underlie a rational system of animal taxonomy and guide the study of animal anatomy. Digging deeper into their differences, their particular disagreements over specific issues within zoology and anatomy culminated in the articulation of two competing and divergent philosophical views on the aims and methods of the life sciences. The emergence of these two distinct positions has had a lasting impact in the development of evolutionary and developmental biology. This essay will provide an overview of the conceptual themes of the debate, its implications for the development of the life sciences, and its role in the history of embryology and developmental biology.

BACKGROUND: The City of Phoenix initiated the HeatReady program in 2018 to prepare for extreme heat, as there was no official tool, framework, or mechanism at the city level to manage extreme heat. The current landscape of heat safety culture in schools, which are critical community hubs, has received less illumination. HeatReady Schools—a critical component of a HeatReady City—are those that are increasingly able to identify, prepare for, mitigate, track, and respond to the negative impacts of schoolgrounds heat. However, minimal attention has been given to formalize heat preparedness in schools to mitigate high temperatures and health concerns in schoolchildren, a heat-vulnerable population. This study set out to understand heat perceptions, (re)actions, and recommendations of key stakeholders and to identify critical themes around heat readiness. METHODS: An exploratory sequential mixed-methods case study approach was used. These methods focused on acquiring new insight on heat perceptions at elementary schools through semi-structured interviews using thematic analysis and the Delphi panel. Participants included public health professionals and school community members at two elementary schools—one public charter, one public—in South Phoenix, Arizona, a region that has been burdened historically with inequitable distribution of heat resources due to environmental racism and injustices. RESULTS: Findings demonstrated that 1) current heat safety resources are available but not fully utilized within the school sites, 2) expert opinions support that extreme heat readiness plans must account for site-specific needs, particularly education as a first step, and 3) students are negatively impacted by the effects of extreme heat, whether direct or indirect, both inside and outside the classroom. CONCLUSIONS: From key informant interviews and a Delphi panel, a list of 30 final recommendations were developed as important actions to be taken to become “HeatReady.” Future work will apply these recommendations in a HeatReady School Growth Tool that schools can tailor be to their individual needs to improve heat safety and protection measures at schools.