Evolutionism has a two-tiered reductionistic connotation meaning structure:
The first level is to take all knowledge about physiology and functions in a broad sense (functions of tissue and organ, as well as character, structure, behavior etc.) into consideration in the study of species, which is a sum total of different phenotypes. And to find out the corresponding relations between functions of species and the environment by comparing functions at one or several similar physiological positions among different species.
The second level is based on the research mentioned above. It synthesizes all the function-environment corresponding relations in different species, taking into view how the various species existed in the historical environment in order to position when and where the species existed. Namely, it interprets the multichannel evolution of species as one part involved in the huge historical relation between the holistic biosphere and the global macro environment that brought about variations and selections.
When Darwin worked on The Origin of Species, he was not aware of the logic narrative order of the two levels mentioned above, nor did he deliberately compose it in this order. However, when we analyze the author's design skeleton of The Origin of Species, we may find that the logic arrangement of the two-level relations was repeatedly presented in the book. This kind of logic narrative relations is the analytical model of the evolution reductionistic system, which is the analysis of the connotation meaning structure of the biosphere. Evolution can be seen as the first model explaining the connotation meaning structure, and other theories in biology are analytic models about functional structures.
Evolutionism opened up the first path for the research of connotation meaning systems. However, the latter theory is only at the threshold and has a long way to go. Because evolutionism is limited in that it only approximately explains the top-layer meaning structures among all levels of biological researches, the other bottom levels have not yet been incorporated into the connotation meaning structure.
Today, at every level of biology, we could see astronomical amounts of experimental evidence and data about functional process, especially at the most basic level. Research papers on this aspect pile up. Experimental functional biology has, in a sense, reached its limit, because no matter at what level, functional experiments have basically realized their goals in process researches, and all the details of all sorts of functional nature have been sorted out. Functional biological sciences have prepared sufficient knowledge for the theoretical development of the biological connotation meaning system, yet the research of deep-structure theory is far from ready in its own preparations. The main obstacle causing all these problems is that the current theory of evolution is unable to incorporate the knowledge of microfunctional biology into its theoretical system. That is "a gap between functional biology and evolutionary biology" (said by Ernst Mayr).
Diversity biology theory falls far short of its goal. Based on the reductionistic framework of evolutionism that is founded by Darwin, diversity biology theory needs to make a comprehensive breakthrough to realize a complete, cross-layer synthesis. It is time for a new synthesized biological theory to emerge. Deep-structure theory is answering the call of this new historic era.