DOCSLIB.ORG

Evolutionary Developmental Biology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evolutionary Developmental Biology Evolutionary Developmental It all started with the Swiss professor Louis Agassiz (1807-1873), who emigrated to the US and became a Harvard prof. Biology Hence, the embryos of different animals resemble each other more strongly in proportion as we examine them at an earlier period. during almost the whole period of embryonic life, the young fish and the young frog differ scarcely at all: so it is with the young snake compared with EVO DEVO the embryo bird. a.k.a. “EVO-DEVO” —Principles of Zoology (1848) Agassiz had shown that embryonic fish go from a stage with an Heterocercal-tailed fish also appear earlier in the fossil record than asymmetrical, heterocercal tail (top), to a stage with a symmetrical homocercal-tailed fish. homocercal tail (bottom). Cheirolepis 380 million years old Caturus 180 million years old 1 This also seemed to parallel the “ladder of complexity”: less This “threefold parallelism” seemed of crucial importance. complex fish, like the sturgeon (top), had heterocercal tails, while but what did it mean? more complex fish, like bass (bottom), had homocercal tails. But Agassiz, the “last of the scientific creationists”, Agassiz certainly thought it was important! refused to consider that this “threefold pattern” might have an evolutionary explanation. I have devoted my whole life to the study of Nature, and yet a single In one word, all these facts in sentence may express all that I have their natural connection done. I have shown that there is a proclaim aloud the One God, correspondence between the succession whom man may know, adore, of Fishes in geological times and the and love; and Natural History different stages of their growth in must in good time become the the egg, — that is all. It chanced to analysis of the thoughts of the be a result that was found to apply Creator of the Universe. to other groups and has led to other conclusions of a like nature. — “Essay on —Lecture, 1869 Classification” (1859) 2 Darwin, however, thought that it could only make sense if you assumed some kind of evolutionary link among organisms! “Darwin’s Apostle to Germany”, Ernst Haeckel Agassiz insists that ancient animals resemble to a certain extent the embryos (1834-1919) popularized of recent animals of the same classes; Darwinian ideas in his or that the geological succession of extinct native country. He’s the forms is in some degree parallel to the embryological development of recent one who drew up forms. I must follow Pictet and Huxley in elaborate tree diagrams of thinking that the truth of this doctrine is very far from proved. Yet I fully expect how evolution had to see it hereafter confirmed. progressed (with man at For this doctrine of Agassiz accords well the top, of course). with the theory of natural selection. —Origin of Species, chapter 10 Haeckel was also a great Here’s another picture of invertebrate zoologist — his work—this illustrates he worked a lot on the microscopic silica protists, sponges and skeletons of some marine jellyfish— and a gifted protists called Radiolaria illustrator, even —which I put in here for influencing the applied no other reason than that arts and design motifs of they look really cool. his time. 3 He was also a student of embryology, or ontogeny. He’s often quoted as saying “Ontogeny recapitulates Haeckel reasoned thus: phylogeny”, but what he actually said was: • Evolution would add changes to the adult stages of the life cycle – This makes the most sense if you’re a Lamarckian—and The rapid and brief ontogeny Haeckel did accept Lamarckian evolution! is a condensed synopsis of • Previous adult stages would be “pushed backwards” the long and slow history in developmental time of the stem (phylogeny). – Embryonic development was a record (often condensed and abridged and compressed) of an organism’s past evolutionary history • “Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny”—Haeckel’s “Biogenetic Law” The truth turned out to be much more interesting. • Haeckel’s “Biogenetic Law” doesn’t work—organisms do not literally repeat their ancestral stages in any real sense – “Von Baer’s Law,” proposed by Haeckel’s rival Karl von Baer, is more accurate: Generalized features, common to all members of a taxon, appear in development before the features of subgroups do. – . but evolution can and does modify any stage of an organism’s life cycle, sometimes almost beyond recognition • BUT. learning how evolution and development are interrelated has become a very fruitful area of research. 4 Vertebrate embryos do go The ways that different through a stage— vertebrates get to the pharyngula, known as the however, vary a great deal—the pharyngula—at early stages of chicken which they most development (top) don’t look closely resemble anything like the early stages of each other. frog, fish, or amphioxus Haeckel has been development (bottom), largely accused of faking because of the very different his drawings, but amounts of yolk in different eggs the similarities at affecting the cells’ ability to the pharyngula divide. stage are real. We now know that Development across embryos at the the vertebrates may phylotypic stage are be diagrammed as an most similar, not only hourglass—very in shape, but in different early stages patterns of gene and adults, but a expression. Notice common phylotypic that at the phylotypic stage, the pharyngula, stage, a set of genes in between. Other called HOX is phyla, such as transcribed and arthropods, show a translated—more similar pattern. later on what they do! 5 Embryos may show features that the adults have lost—this Haeckel’s “Law” isn’t accepted today, but in some is another source of information for classification and cases he was dead-on. phylogenetic studies. “. this history of the embryo (ontogeny) must be completed by a second, equally valuable, and closely connected branch of thought— the history of race (phylogeny). Both of these branches of evolutionary science, are, in my opinion, in the closest causal connection; this arises from the reciprocal action of the laws of heredity and adaptation. ’” These barnacles were once classified as molluscs. until their larvae were discovered to be very much like the larvae of crustaceans—which is what Even barnacles really are. rhizocephalans— weird fungus-like parasites on decapod crustaceans such as crabs—have turned out to be crustaceans very close to the true barnacles, based on their larvae. 6 Another nifty example (which von Baer himself never believed): "Sea squirts", or tunicates, have blobby adult Heterochrony bodies, but larvae with chordate features. • “Different timing”—evolutionary change in the timing of a developmental event adult colony of the tunicate Botryllus schlosseri – May be global (affecting whole organism) or local (restricted to one part or organ) • Heterochronic effects may be grouped into two broad classes: – Paedomorphosis: descendant is less developed / "tadpole larva" of the tunicate less mature than ancestor Botryllus schlosseri – Peramorphosis: descendant is more developed / more mature than ancestor Modes of Heterochrony Case study: Axolotls • Paedomorphosis can be the result of: • The axolotl was first described as a bizarre aquatic – progenesis (finishing early) salamander with external gills. – neoteny (slower growth rate) – postdisplacement (starting late) – Gills are a feature of larval salamanders. • Peramorphosis can result from: – Yet axolotls reached sexual maturity, and bred. – hypermorphosis (finishing late). • Iodine added to the water suddenly transformed – acceleration (greater growth rate) axolotls into adult tiger salamanders (Ambystoma – predisplacement (starting early) tigrinum) • These terms may apply to whole organisms – Some populations of axolotls don’t transform, or (global heterochrony) or to parts of them (local transform only rarely, when iodine is added. heterochrony) 7 Top: adult tiger salamander. Paedomorphosis is common among salamanders. Note Bottom: axolotl (paedomorphic tiger salamander) how this hellbender (top) and mudpuppy (bottom) both have gills, paddle tails, and weaker limbs. And then this aquatic salamander, Siren, is probably the champion paedomorphic salamander of all time! What’s more, these can’t be induced to metamorphose. 8 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Phylum Vertebrata: a Case for Zoological Recognition Naoki Irie1,2* , Noriyuki Satoh3 and Shigeru Kuratani4
    Irie et al. Zoological Letters (2018) 4:32 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40851-018-0114-y REVIEW Open Access The phylum Vertebrata: a case for zoological recognition Naoki Irie1,2* , Noriyuki Satoh3 and Shigeru Kuratani4 Abstract The group Vertebrata is currently placed as a subphylum in the phylum Chordata, together with two other subphyla, Cephalochordata (lancelets) and Urochordata (ascidians). The past three decades, have seen extraordinary advances in zoological taxonomy and the time is now ripe for reassessing whether the subphylum position is truly appropriate for vertebrates, particularly in light of recent advances in molecular phylogeny, comparative genomics, and evolutionary developmental biology. Four lines of current research are discussed here. First, molecular phylogeny has demonstrated that Deuterostomia comprises Ambulacraria (Echinodermata and Hemichordata) and Chordata (Cephalochordata, Urochordata, and Vertebrata), each clade being recognized as a mutually comparable phylum. Second, comparative genomic studies show that vertebrates alone have experienced two rounds of whole-genome duplication, which makes the composition of their gene family unique. Third, comparative gene-expression profiling of vertebrate embryos favors an hourglass pattern of development, the most conserved stage of which is recognized as a phylotypic period characterized by the establishment of a body plan definitively associated with a phylum. This mid-embryonic conservation is supported robustly in vertebrates, but only weakly in chordates. Fourth, certain complex patterns of body plan formation (especially of the head, pharynx, and somites) are recognized throughout the vertebrates, but not in any other animal groups. For these reasons, we suggest that it is more appropriate to recognize vertebrates as an independent phylum, not as a subphylum of the phylum Chordata.
    [Show full text]
  • There Is No Highly Conserved Embryonic Stage in the Vertebrates: Implications for Current Theories of Evolution and Development
    Anat Embryol (1997) 196:91–106 © Springer-Verlag 1997 REVIEW ARTICLE &roles:Michael K. Richardson · James Hanken Mayoni L. Gooneratne · Claude Pieau Albert Raynaud · Lynne Selwood · Glenda M. Wright There is no highly conserved embryonic stage in the vertebrates: implications for current theories of evolution and development &misc:Accepted: 5 April 1997 &p.1:Abstract Embryos of different species of vertebrate tal biology, and especially in the conservation of devel- share a common organisation and often look similar. opmental mechanisms, re-examination of the extent of Adult differences among species become more apparent variation in vertebrate embryos is long overdue. We pres- through divergence at later stages. Some authors have ent here the first review of the external morphology of suggested that members of most or all vertebrate clades tailbud embryos, illustrated with original specimens pass through a virtually identical, conserved stage. This from a wide range of vertebrate groups. We find that em- idea was promoted by Haeckel, and has recently been re- bryos at the tailbud stage – thought to correspond to a vived in the context of claims regarding the universality conserved stage – show variations in form due to allome- of developmental mechanisms. Thus embryonic resem- try, heterochrony, and differences in body plan and blance at the tailbud stage has been linked with a con- somite number. These variations foreshadow important served pattern of developmental gene expression – the differences in adult body form. Contrary to recent claims zootype. Haeckel’s drawings of the external morphology that all vertebrate embryos pass through a stage when of various vertebrates remain the most comprehensive they are the same size, we find a greater than 10-fold comparative data purporting to show a conserved stage.
    [Show full text]
  • Stages of Embryonic Development of the Zebrafish
    DEVELOPMENTAL DYNAMICS 2032553’10 (1995) Stages of Embryonic Development of the Zebrafish CHARLES B. KIMMEL, WILLIAM W. BALLARD, SETH R. KIMMEL, BONNIE ULLMANN, AND THOMAS F. SCHILLING Institute of Neuroscience, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon 97403-1254 (C.B.K., S.R.K., B.U., T.F.S.); Department of Biology, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755 (W.W.B.) ABSTRACT We describe a series of stages for Segmentation Period (10-24 h) 274 development of the embryo of the zebrafish, Danio (Brachydanio) rerio. We define seven broad peri- Pharyngula Period (24-48 h) 285 ods of embryogenesis-the zygote, cleavage, blas- Hatching Period (48-72 h) 298 tula, gastrula, segmentation, pharyngula, and hatching periods. These divisions highlight the Early Larval Period 303 changing spectrum of major developmental pro- Acknowledgments 303 cesses that occur during the first 3 days after fer- tilization, and we review some of what is known Glossary 303 about morphogenesis and other significant events that occur during each of the periods. Stages sub- References 309 divide the periods. Stages are named, not num- INTRODUCTION bered as in most other series, providing for flexi- A staging series is a tool that provides accuracy in bility and continued evolution of the staging series developmental studies. This is because different em- as we learn more about development in this spe- bryos, even together within a single clutch, develop at cies. The stages, and their names, are based on slightly different rates. We have seen asynchrony ap- morphological features, generally readily identi- pearing in the development of zebrafish, Danio fied by examination of the live embryo with the (Brachydanio) rerio, embryos fertilized simultaneously dissecting stereomicroscope.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of Predetermined Germ Cells in Vertebrate Embryos: Implications for Macroevolution
    EVOLUTION & DEVELOPMENT 5:4, 414–431 (2003) Evolution of predetermined germ cells in vertebrate embryos: implications for macroevolution Andrew D. Johnson,a,b,* Matthew Drum,b Rosemary F. Bachvarova,c Thomas Masi,b Mary E. White,d and Brian I. Crotherd aDivision of Genetics, University of Nottingham, Queen’s Medical Centre, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK bDepartment of Biological Science, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA cDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, 1300 York Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA dDepartment of Biological Science, Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond, LA 70402, USA *Author for correspondence (e-mail: [email protected]) SUMMARY The germ line is established in animal embryos To determine which mechanism is ancestral to the tetrapod with the formation of primordial germ cells (PGCs), which give lineage and to understand the pattern of inheritance in higher rise to gametes. Therefore, the need to form PGCs can act as vertebrates, we used a phylogenetic approach to analyze a developmental constraint by inhibiting the evolution of basic morphological processes in both groups and correlated embryonic patterning mechanisms that compromise their these with mechanisms of germ cell determination. Our results development. Conversely, events that stabilize the PGCs indicate that regulative germ cell determination is a property of may liberate these constraints. Two modes of germ cell embryos retaining ancestral embryological processes, determination exist in animal embryos: (a) either PGCs are whereas predetermined germ cells are found in embryos predetermined by the inheritance of germ cell determinants with derived morphological traits. These correlations (germ plasm) or (b) PGCs are formed by inducing signals suggest that regulative germ cell formation is an important secreted by embryonic tissues (i.e., regulative determination).
    [Show full text]
  • The Body Plan Concept and Its Centrality in Evo-Devo
    Evo Edu Outreach (2012) 5:219–230 DOI 10.1007/s12052-012-0424-z EVO-DEVO The Body Plan Concept and Its Centrality in Evo-Devo Katherine E. Willmore Published online: 14 June 2012 # Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012 Abstract A body plan is a suite of characters shared by a by Joseph Henry Woodger in 1945, and means ground plan group of phylogenetically related animals at some point or structural plan (Hall 1999; Rieppel 2006; Woodger 1945). during their development. The concept of bauplane, or body Essentially, a body plan is a suite of characters shared by a plans, has played and continues to play a central role in the group of phylogenetically related animals at some point study of evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo). during their development. However, long before the term Despite the importance of the body plan concept in evo- body plan was coined, its importance was demonstrated in devo, many researchers may not be familiar with the pro- research programs that presaged the field of evo-devo, per- gression of ideas that have led to our current understanding haps most famously (though erroneously) by Ernst Haeck- of body plans, and/or current research on the origin and el’s recapitulation theory. Since the rise of evo-devo as an maintenance of body plans. This lack of familiarity, as well independent field of study, the body plan concept has as former ties between the body plan concept and metaphys- formed the backbone upon which much of the current re- ical ideology is likely responsible for our underappreciation search is anchored.
    [Show full text]
  • 13-Evodevo%2011%20%20Iii
    B. Duplication and Divergence • Genes – Hox genes: multiple; duplications in vertebrates – Myo D genes: family for different stages of muscle – Globin genes: expressed at different times with different oxygen affinities • Freeing of constraints allows divergence for new function C. Co-option • jaw to mammalian ear – jawless fish form jaw from first gill arch – then next gill forms hyomandibular bone to connect skull to jaw – this also transmits sound to ear and becomes part of middle ear in terrestrial vertebrates • the quadrate and articular bones are not needed in mammals so become also part of middle and inner ear Co-option of a Structural Gene Product • lens crystallins – small soluble proteins at very high concentrations – some of them are identical to various metabolic enzymes in vertebrates and invertebrates • explanation: what is a good lens protein? – high solubility and no aggregation – so use what you have and concentrate it – economy Correlation • Coordination when one part changes and induces a second to follow – one (or more than one) module changes • morphological: to integrate anatomical change • biochemical: as in ligand-receptor interactions Morphological Correlation • Neural crest pharyngeal arches and facial bone and muscle • Neural crest of each rhombomere (1,2,4,6) each particular set of bones and muscle Pharyngeal Arches connecting them (one module) • Facilitates coordination of changes in each module chick N.C. cranial structures Experiment to Change Module • Gold foil in early chick hindlimb to separate regions
    [Show full text]
  • Embryology of the Lamprey and Evolution of the Vertebrate Jaw: Insights from Molecular and Developmental Perspectives
    doi 10.1098/rstb.2001.0976 Embryology of the lamprey and evolution of the vertebrate jaw: insights from molecular and developmental perspectives Shigeru Kuratani*, Yoshiaki Nobusada, Naoto Horigome and Yasuyo Shigetani Department of Biology, Faculty of Science, Okayama University, 3^1-1 Tsushimanaka, Okayama 700^8530, Japan Evolution of the vertebrate jaw has been reviewed and discussed based on the developmental pattern of the Japanese marine lamprey, Lampetra japonica. Though it never forms a jointed jaw apparatus, the L. japonica embryo exhibits the typical embryonic structure as well as the conserved regulatory gene expression patterns of vertebrates. The lamprey therefore shares the phylotype of vertebrates, the conserved embryonic pattern that appears at pharyngula stage, rather than representing an intermediate evolutionary state. Both gnathostomes and lampreys exhibit a tripartite con¢guration of the rostral-most crest-derived ectomesenchyme, each part occupying an anatomically equivalent site. Di¡erentiated oral structure becomes apparent in post-pharyngula development. Due to the solid nasohypophyseal plate, the post-optic ectomesenchyme of the lamprey fails to grow rostromedially to form the medial nasal septum as in gnathostomes, but forms the upper lip instead. The gnathostome jaw may thus have arisen through a process of ontogenetic repatterning, in which a heterotopic shift of mesenchyme^epithelial relationships would have been involved. Further identi¢cation of shifts in tissue interaction and expression of regulatory genes are necessary to describe the evolution of the jaw fully from the standpoint of evolutionary develop- mental biology. Keywords: lamprey; embryo; pharynx; mandibular arch; premandibular region; evolution evidence indicates convergent origins. A di¡erence in 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Transcriptome Analysis Reveals Vertebrate Phylotypic Period During Organogenesis
    ARTICLE Received 11 Nov 2010 | Accepted 21 Feb 2011 | Published 22 Mar 2011 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1248 Comparative transcriptome analysis reveals vertebrate phylotypic period during organogenesis Naoki Irie1 & Shigeru Kuratani1 One of the central issues in evolutionary developmental biology is how we can formulate the relationships between evolutionary and developmental processes. Two major models have been proposed: the ‘funnel-like’ model, in which the earliest embryo shows the most conserved morphological pattern, followed by diversifying later stages, and the ‘hourglass’ model, in which constraints are imposed to conserve organogenesis stages, which is called the phylotypic period. Here we perform a quantitative comparative transcriptome analysis of several model vertebrate embryos and show that the pharyngula stage is most conserved, whereas earlier and later stages are rather divergent. These results allow us to predict approximate developmental timetables between different species, and indicate that pharyngula embryos have the most conserved gene expression profiles, which may be the source of the basic body plan of vertebrates. 1 Laboratory for Evolutionary Morphology, RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology, 2-2-3 Minatojima-minami, Chuo-ku, Kobe, Hyogo 650-0047, Japan. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to N.I. (email: [email protected]). NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 2:248 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1248 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved. ARTICLE NatUre cOMMUNicatiONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1248 he relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny has long been an intriguing question in comparative and evolution- Tary embryology1. Biogenetic law of Ernst Haeckel assumed a parallelism between ontogeny and phylogeny, and asserted that embryogenesis is a recapitulation of ancient organisms because all animals start their existence from a one-celled stage and develop into morula, blastula and then gastrula stages2,3.
    [Show full text]
  • GASTRULATION in CYPRINIDS: MORPHOGENESIS and GENE EXPRESSION by HENRI W.J. STROBAND*, GEERTRUY TE KRONNIE and LUCY P.M. TIMMERMA
    GASTRULATION IN CYPRINIDS: MORPHOGENESIS AND GENE EXPRESSION by HENRI W.J. STROBAND*, GEERTRUY TE KRONNIE and LUCY P.M. TIMMERMANS (Agricultural University,Wageningen Institute of AnimalScience, Dept. of Experimental Animal Morphologyand Cell Biology,Marijkeweg 40, 6709 PG Wageningen, The Netherlands) ABSTRACT Early developmentof cyprinid teleosts is summarizedwith special attention to gastrulation. Making use of comparisonwith Xenopus,functions are suggestedfor the uncleavedyolk cell, concerning induction and patterning processes before and during gastrulation. It is concluded that cyprinid development has a number of very specific aspects, involving morphogenesis and, very likely, gene functions. This should be realized when gene expression patterns during developmentare studied in this group of teleosts as a model of developmentin higher vertebrates. KEYWORDS: teleost, mesoderm induction, gastrulation,gene expression,yolk cell function. INTRODUCTION For two main reasons a tendency to generalize developmental processes in vertebrates is manifest. Firstly, vertebrates pass through a stage of remark- able morphological similarity, the pharyngula or phylotypic stage, when the vertebrate bodyplan has been laid down. Secondly, a number of genes, likely to be involved in mesoderm induction, axis determination or pattern forma- tion, have counterparts in the various classes of vertebrates. Therefore, the study of gene activity during development in lower vertebrates contributes to the understanding of developmental processes in mammals. Remarke- bly, the morphogenetic processes leading to this phylotypic stage differ considerably between classes. Most strikingly, they vary from holoblastic cleavage in amphibians and mammals to meroblastic cleavage in teleosts and birds, and from gastrulation movements through a circular blastopore in amphibians and fish to a linear primitive streak in birds and mammals.
    [Show full text]
  • Animal Egg As Evolutionary Innovation: a Solution to the Embryonic Hourglass Puzzle
    PERSPECTIVE AND HYPOTHESIS Animal Egg as Evolutionary Innovation: A Solution to the ‘‘Embryonic Hourglass’’ Puzzle STUART A. NEWMANÃ Department of Cell Biology and Anatomy, New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York ABSTRACT The evolutionary origin of the egg stage of animal development presents several difficulties for conventional developmental and evolutionary narratives. If the egg’s internal organization represents a template for key features of the developed organism, why can taxa within a given phylum exhibit very different egg types, pass through a common intermediate morphology (the so- called ‘‘phylotypic stage’’), only to diverge again, thus exemplifying the embryonic ‘‘hourglass’’? Moreover, if different egg types typically represent adaptations to different environmental conditions, why do birds and mammals, for example, have such vastly different eggs with respect to size, shape, and postfertilization dynamics, whereas all these features are more similar for ascidians and mammals? Here, I consider the possibility that different body plans had their origin in self- organizing physical processes in ancient clusters of cells, and suggest that eggs represented a set of independent evolutionary innovations subsequently inserted into the developmental trajectories of such aggregates. I first describe how ‘‘dynamical patterning modules’’ (DPMs) associations between components of the metazoan developmental-genetic toolkit and certain physical processes and effects may have organized primitive animal body plans independently of an egg stage. Next, I describe how adaptive specialization of cells released from such aggregates could have become ‘‘proto-eggs,’’ which regenerated the parental cell clusters by cleavage, conserving the characteristic DPMs available to a lineage. Then, I show how known processes of cytoplasmic reorganization following fertilization are often based on spontaneous, self-organizing physical effects (‘‘egg-patterning processes’’: EPPs).
    [Show full text]
  • Embryonic Lethality Is Not Sufficient to Explain Hourglass-Like Conservation of Vertebrate Embryos
    Uchida et al. EvoDevo (2018) 9:7 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13227-018-0095-0 EvoDevo RESEARCH Open Access Embryonic lethality is not sufcient to explain hourglass‑like conservation of vertebrate embryos Yui Uchida1* , Masahiro Uesaka1, Takayoshi Yamamoto1, Hiroyuki Takeda1,2 and Naoki Irie1,2* Abstract Background: Understanding the general trends in developmental changes during animal evolution, which are often associated with morphological diversifcation, has long been a central issue in evolutionary developmental biology. Recent comparative transcriptomic studies revealed that gene expression profles of mid-embryonic period tend to be more evolutionarily conserved than those in earlier or later periods. While the hourglass-like divergence of devel- opmental processes has been demonstrated in a variety of animal groups such as vertebrates, arthropods, and nema- todes, the exact mechanism leading to this mid-embryonic conservation remains to be clarifed. One possibility is that the mid-embryonic period (pharyngula period in vertebrates) is highly prone to embryonic lethality, and the resulting negative selections lead to evolutionary conservation of this phase. Here, we tested this “mid-embryonic lethality hypothesis” by measuring the rate of lethal phenotypes of three diferent species of vertebrate embryos subjected to two kinds of perturbations: transient perturbations and genetic mutations. Results: By subjecting zebrafsh (Danio rerio), African clawed frog (Xenopus laevis), and chicken (Gallus gallus) embryos to transient perturbations, namely heat shock and inhibitor treatments during three developmental periods [early (represented by blastula and gastrula), pharyngula, and late], we found that the early stages showed the highest rate of lethal phenotypes in all three species. This result was corroborated by perturbation with genetic mutations.
    [Show full text]
  • Identification of Vertebra-Like Elements and Their Possible Differentiation from Sclerotomes in the Hagfish
    ARTICLE Received 9 Feb 2011 | Accepted 19 May 2011 | Published 28 Jun 2011 DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1355 Identification of vertebra-like elements and their possible differentiation from sclerotomes in the hagfish Kinya G. Ota1,2, Satoko Fujimoto1, Yasuhiro Oisi1 & Shigeru Kuratani1 The hagfish, a group of extant jawless fish, are known to lack true vertebrae and, for this reason, have often been excluded from the group Vertebrata. However, it has yet to be conclusively shown whether hagfish lack all vertebra-like structures, and whether their somites follow developmental processes and patterning distinct from those in lampreys and gnathostomes. Here we report the presence of vertebra-like cartilages in the in-shore hagfish,Eptatretus burgeri. These elements arise as small nodules occupying anatomical positions comparable to those of gnathostome vertebrae. Examination of hagfish embryos suggests that the ventromedial portion of a somite transforms into mesenchymal cells that express cognates of Pax1/9 and Twist, strikingly similar to the pattern of sclerotome development in gnathostomes. We conclude that the vertebra-like elements in the hagfish are homologous to gnathostome vertebrae, implying that this animal underwent secondary reduction of vertebrae in most of the trunk. 1 Laboratory for Evolutionary Morphology, RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology, Kobe 650-0047, Japan. 2 Marine Research Station, Institute of Cellular and Organismic Biology, Academia Sinica, Yilan 26242, Taiwan. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to K.G.O. (email: [email protected]). NatURE COMMUNicatiONS | 2:373 | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1355 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications © 2011 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved. ARTICLE NatUre cOMMUNicatiONS | DOI: 10.1038/ncomms1355 ertebrae arise as segmental endoskeletal elements associ- a ated with the notochord, and are regarded as a vertebrate 1–5 Vsynapomorphy .
    [Show full text]