DOCSLIB.ORG

Two Schools of Evolutionary Thought

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Two Schools of Evolutionary Thought Evolution of centralized nervous systems: Two schools of evolutionary thought R. Glenn Northcutt1 Laboratory of Comparative Neurobiology, Scripps Institution of Oceanography and Department of Neurosciences, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093 Edited by John C. Avise, University of California, Irvine, CA, and approved May 1, 2012 (received for review February 27, 2012) Understanding the evolution of centralized nervous systems Fossil Record requires an understanding of metazoan phylogenetic interrela- The fossil record is notoriously incomplete. Fossils essentially exist tionships, their fossil record, the variation in their cephalic neural as snapshots in time, and these snapshots are of varying quality. characters, and the development of these characters. Each of these Some are grainy, providing only a glimpse of organisms and their topics involves comparative approaches, and both cladistic and ecology; others are fine-grained photographs of individual taxa phenetic methodologies have been applied. Our understanding of and their ecology (Lagerstätten). Regardless, each snapshot metazoan phylogeny has increased greatly with the cladistic provides unique and critical insights into the minimal age of a analysis of molecular data, and relaxed molecular clocks gener- radiation. Each snapshot helps calibrate molecular clocks, establish ally date the origin of bilaterians at 600–700 Mya (during the ecological settings of evolutionary events, and reveal unsuspected Ediacaran). Although the taxonomic affinities of the Ediacaran bi- morphological characters that challenge current conclusions re- ota remain uncertain, a conservative interpretation suggests that garding character transformation (2). a number of these taxa form clades that are closely related, if not stem clades of bilaterian crown clades. Analysis of brain–body Ediacaran Biota. The earliest reported fossils of possible metazoan complexity among extant bilaterians indicates that diffuse nerve embryos and adults are in the Ediacaran Doushantuo Formation nets and possibly, ganglionated cephalic neural systems existed in (∼570 Mya) in southern China (3–5). Small globular fossils, ∼200 Ediacaran organisms. An outgroup analysis of cephalic neural char- μm in diameter, show remarkable cellular details and have been acters among extant metazoans also indicates that the last com- interpreted as cnidarian gastrulae and planulae as well as bilaterian mon bilaterian ancestor possessed a diffuse nerve plexus and that gastrulae comparable with living molluscans and echinoderms (4). brains evolved independently at least four times. In contrast, the However, the interpretation of these fossils as bilaterian meta- hypothesis of a tripartite brain, based primarily on phenetic analysis zoans has been questioned, and they have been reinterpreted as of developmental genetic data, indicates that the brain arose in the encysted holozoan protists (6). Similar problems plague the last common bilaterian ancestor. Hopefully, this debate will be re- earliest reported adult bilaterian, Vernanimalcula,whichisalso solved by cladistic analysis of the genomes of additional taxa and an from the Doushantuo Formation of southern China (7, 8). Fossils increased understanding of character identity genetic networks. of Vernanimalcula (∼200 μm in diameter) have been described as broadly oval and triploblastic with a mouth, a differentiated gut Cambrian explosion | Neoproterozoic | phyletic comparisons | Urbilateria surrounded by paired coeloms, and an anus. The rostral end of these “small spring animals” is also reported to have three pairs of external pits that have been interpreted as sensory organs (7). The fact that some of these building stones are universal does not, of This interpretation has been questioned, however, and these course, mean that the organs to which they contribute are as old as fossils have been claimed to be taphonomic artifacts in which these molecules or their precursors. phosphates were deposited within a spherical object, such as the cysts of algal acritarchs (9). von Salvini-Plawen and Mayr (1) The earliest fossils of macroscopic organisms interpreted as ny consideration of the evolution of centralized nervous metazoans, including bilaterians, are in the Ediacaran strata Asystems is inextricably linked to an understanding of the above the Doushantuo formation (10). They average 10 cm but phylogeny of living metazoans, their fossil history, the vast range reach an extreme of 1 m in length, and they include forms that A of complexity in their nervous systems, and the development of are frond-, disk-, and worm-like (Fig. 1 ); their interpretation has had a tumultuous history. Many of these fossils were discovered in these nervous systems. For this reason, any attempt to reconstruct the late 1940s and were interpreted as representatives of living the phylogeny of metazoan CNSs must be based on all lines of metazoan phyla. Forms like Eoporpita (Fig. 1A, 1) were inter- evidence available. The molecular phylogenetic studies of the preted as cnidarian pelagic medusa (11), and frond-like forms, last 20 y are particularly important in understanding metazoan such as Charniodiscus (Fig. 1A, 2), were interpreted as possible interrelationships as well as the time frame in which these animals cnidarian sea pins (12). Still other forms of these fossils were arose and radiated, and we now have increased insights into the interpreted as stem bilaterians. For example, Dickinsonia (Fig. 1A, genetics underlying the development of CNSs. 3) was interpreted as a flatworm (13), Arkarua (Fig. 1A, 4) was First, I will review the fossil history of the earliest putative met- interpreted as an echinoderm (14), Spriggina (Fig. 1A, 5) was azoans, and then, I will discuss different comparative approaches to analyzing both molecular and morphological data: the mo- lecular clock hypothesis, which has yielded a range of possible This paper results from the Arthur M. Sackler Colloquium of the National Academy of dates for the origin and divergence of metazoans; developmental Sciences, “In the Light of Evolution VI: Brain and Behavior,” held January 19–21, 2012, at the Arnold and Mabel Beckman Center of the National Academies of Sciences and Engi- genetics and its contribution to our understanding of the pat- neering in Irvine, CA. The complete program and audio files of most presentations are terning of metazoan bodies, particularly patterning of the CNS; available on the NAS Web site at www.nasonline.org/evolution_vi. and conclusions based on the first outgroup analysis of metazoan Author contributions: R.G.N. analyzed data and wrote the paper. central neural characters. Finally, I will review two hypotheses The author declares no conflict of interest. concerning the morphological complexity of the last common This article is a PNAS Direct Submission. bilaterian ancestor. 1E-mail: [email protected]. www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1201889109 PNAS Early Edition | 1of8 Downloaded by guest on September 24, 2021 Fig. 1. Reconstruction of the Ediacaran (A) and Burgess Shale (B) biotas. The Ediacaran biota is reconstructed to convey maximal morphological complexity. (A)1,Eoporpita;2,Charniodiscus;3,Dickinsonia;4,Arkarua;5,Spriggina;6,Praecambridium; 7, soft-bodied “trilobite”;8,Kimberella.(B)1,Burgessochaeta; 2, Lingulella;3,Ottoia;4,Marrella;5,Olenoides;6,Naraoia;7,Canadaspis;8,Sidneyia,9,Opabinia; 10, Anomalocaris; 11, Gogia; 12, Eldonia;13,Pikaia;14, Aysheaia; 15, Hallucigenia; 16, Odontogriphus;17,Dinomischus. interpreted as an annelid capable of active swimming (15), and the White Sea assemblage are diverse and suggest the presence Praecambridium (Fig. 1A, 6) and a soft-bodied “trilobite” not for- of small bilaterians (21). mally described (Fig. 1A, 7) were interpreted as stem arthropods The Nama assemblage has less diversity than either the Avalon (16, 17). After this burst of descriptions, Ediacaran anatomy was or White Sea assemblages, and it is dominated by frond-like taxa, reevaluated; claims were made that all Ediacarans were orga- called arboreomorphs, and simple cylindrical, sessile taxa, called nized on a quilt-like pattern and represented an independent erniettomorphs (21, 22). Bilaterian body fossils are absent, but experiment of nonmetazoan animals, termed the Vendobionta, small calcified shells of Cloudina and Namacalathus and the ear- that failed with the evolution of macrophagous bilaterian meta- liest evidence of predation in the form of holes bored into these zoans (18–20). The concept of the Ediacaran biota as Vendobionta calcified shells do occur (26). was generally abandoned, because paleontologists came to realize Our understanding of body organization and phylogeny of that the Ediacaran biota represents a wide range of morphological Ediacarans is incomplete, but a conservative interpretation of forms (10, 21). the paleontological data indicates that most animals existed To date, the Ediacaran biota includes some 160 taxa (10) found primarily on microbial mats; it was likely a 2D world, with sessile in 40 separate locations representing all parts of the globe except frond-like forms and vagile, small organisms that trophically Antarctica. These biotas are dispersed among three stratigraphic were suspension feeders and grazers. There is little to no evidence zones in named assemblages based on a cladistic analysis of their that pelagic medusae existed (Fig. 1A, 1), but there is considerable spatial and temporal distribution (22): an Avalon assemblage evidence that sponges
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ediacaran) of Earth – Nature’S Experiments
    The Early Animals (Ediacaran) of Earth – Nature’s Experiments Donald Baumgartner Medical Entomologist, Biologist, and Fossil Enthusiast Presentation before Chicago Rocks and Mineral Society May 10, 2014 Illinois Famous for Pennsylvanian Fossils 3 In the Beginning: The Big Bang . Earth formed 4.6 billion years ago Fossil Record Order 95% of higher taxa: Random plant divisions domains & kingdoms Cambrian Atdabanian Fauna Vendian Tommotian Fauna Ediacaran Fauna protists Proterozoic algae McConnell (Baptist)College Pre C - Fossil Order Archaean bacteria Source: Truett Kurt Wise The First Cells . 3.8 billion years ago, oxygen levels in atmosphere and seas were low • Early prokaryotic cells probably were anaerobic • Stromatolites . Divergence separated bacteria from ancestors of archaeans and eukaryotes Stromatolites Dominated the Earth Stromatolites of cyanobacteria ruled the Earth from 3.8 b.y. to 600 m. [2.5 b.y.]. Believed that Earth glaciations are correlated with great demise of stromatolites world-wide. 8 The Oxygen Atmosphere . Cyanobacteria evolved an oxygen-releasing, noncyclic pathway of photosynthesis • Changed Earth’s atmosphere . Increased oxygen favored aerobic respiration Early Multi-Cellular Life Was Born Eosphaera & Kakabekia at 2 b.y in Canada Gunflint Chert 11 Earliest Multi-Cellular Metazoan Life (1) Alga Eukaryote Grypania of MI at 1.85 b.y. MI fossil outcrop 12 Earliest Multi-Cellular Metazoan Life (2) Beads Horodyskia of MT and Aust. at 1.5 b.y. thought to be algae 13 Source: Fedonkin et al. 2007 Rise of Animals Tappania Fungus at 1.5 b.y Described now from China, Russia, Canada, India, & Australia 14 Earliest Multi-Cellular Metazoan Animals (3) Worm-like Parmia of N.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Integrative and Comparative Biology Integrative and Comparative Biology, Volume 58, Number 4, Pp
    Integrative and Comparative Biology Integrative and Comparative Biology, volume 58, number 4, pp. 605–622 doi:10.1093/icb/icy088 Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology SYMPOSIUM INTRODUCTION The Temporal and Environmental Context of Early Animal Evolution: Considering All the Ingredients of an “Explosion” Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/icb/article-abstract/58/4/605/5056706 by Stanford Medical Center user on 15 October 2018 Erik A. Sperling1 and Richard G. Stockey Department of Geological Sciences, Stanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Building 320, Stanford, CA 94305, USA From the symposium “From Small and Squishy to Big and Armored: Genomic, Ecological and Paleontological Insights into the Early Evolution of Animals” presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology, January 3–7, 2018 at San Francisco, California. 1E-mail: [email protected] Synopsis Animals originated and evolved during a unique time in Earth history—the Neoproterozoic Era. This paper aims to discuss (1) when landmark events in early animal evolution occurred, and (2) the environmental context of these evolutionary milestones, and how such factors may have affected ecosystems and body plans. With respect to timing, molecular clock studies—utilizing a diversity of methodologies—agree that animal multicellularity had arisen by 800 million years ago (Ma) (Tonian period), the bilaterian body plan by 650 Ma (Cryogenian), and divergences between sister phyla occurred 560–540 Ma (late Ediacaran). Most purported Tonian and Cryogenian animal body fossils are unlikely to be correctly identified, but independent support for the presence of pre-Ediacaran animals is recorded by organic geochemical biomarkers produced by demosponges.
    [Show full text]
  • Assembly of the Cnidarian Camera-Type Eye from Vertebrate-Like Components
    Assembly of the cnidarian camera-type eye from vertebrate-like components Zbynek Kozmik*†, Jana Ruzickova*‡, Kristyna Jonasova*‡, Yoshifumi Matsumoto§, Pavel Vopalensky*, Iryna Kozmikova*, Hynek Strnad*, Shoji Kawamura§, Joram Piatigorsky†¶, Vaclav Paces*, and Cestmir Vlcek*† *Institute of Molecular Genetics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Videnska 1083, 142 20 Prague 4, Czech Republic; §Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, University of Tokyo, 5-1-5 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8562, Japan; and ¶National Eye Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-3655 Edited by Eviatar Nevo, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel, and approved April 11, 2008 (received for review January 14, 2008) Animal eyes are morphologically diverse. Their assembly, however, containing Tripedalia eyes have sophisticated visual optics as do always relies on the same basic principle, i.e., photoreceptors advanced bilaterian phyla (11). located in the vicinity of dark shielding pigment. Cnidaria as the In the present work, we characterize genes required for the likely sister group to the Bilateria are the earliest branching phylum assembly of camera-type eyes in Tripedalia. We show that the with a well developed visual system. Here, we show that camera- genetic building blocks typical of vertebrate eyes, namely ciliary type eyes of the cubozoan jellyfish, Tripedalia cystophora, use opsin and the melanogenic pathway, are used by the cubozoan genetic building blocks typical of vertebrate eyes, namely, a ciliary eyes. Although our findings of unsuspected parallelism are phototransduction cascade and melanogenic pathway. Our find- consistent with either an independent origin or common ances- ings indicative of parallelism provide an insight into eye evolution. try of cubozoan and vertebrate eyes, we believe the present data Combined, the available data favor the possibility that vertebrate favor the former alternative.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Eric Davidson and Deep Time Douglas H. Erwin Department Of
    Eric Davidson and Deep Time Douglas H. Erwin Department of Paleobiology, MRC-121 National Museum of Natural History Washington, DC 20013-7012 E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Eric Davidson had a deep and abiding interest in the role developmental mechanisms played in the generating evolutionary patterns documented in deep time, from the origin of the euechinoids to the processes responsible for the morphological architectures of major animal clades. Although not an evolutionary biologist, Davidson’s interests long preceded the current excitement over comparative evolutionary developmental biology. Here I discuss three aspects at the intersection between his research and evolutionary patterns in deep time: First, understanding the mechanisms of body plan formation, particularly those associated with the early diversification of major metazoan clades. Second, a critique of early claims about ancestral metazoans based on the discoveries of highly conserved genes across bilaterian animals. Third, Davidson’s own involvement in paleontology through a collaborative study of the fossil embryos from the Ediacaran Doushantuo Formation in south China. Keywords Eric Davidson – Evolution – Gene regulatory networks – Bodyplan – Cambrian Radiation – Echinoderms 1 Introduction Eric Davidson was a developmental biologist, not an evolutionary biologist or paleobiologist. He was driven to understand the mechanisms of gene regulatory control and how they controlled development, but this focus was deeply embedded within concerns about the relationship between development and evolution. Questions about the origin of major metazoan architectures or body plans were central to Eric’s concerns since at least the late 1960s. His 1971 paper with Roy Britten includes a section on “The Evolutionary Growth of the Genome” illustrated with a figure depicting variations in genome size in major animal groups and a metazoan phylogeny (Britten and Davidson 1971).
    [Show full text]
  • Hodin2013 Ch19.Pdf
    736 Part 4 The History of Life How are developmental biology and evolution related? Developmental biol- ogy is the study of the processes by which an organism grows from zygote to reproductive adult. Evolutionary biology is the study of changes in populations across generations. As with non-shattering cereals, evolutionary changes in form and function are rooted in corresponding changes in development. While evo- lutionary biologists are concerned with why such changes occur, developmental biology tells us how these changes happen. Darwin recognized that for a com- plete understanding of evolution, one needs to take account of both the “why” and the “how,” and hence, of the “important subject” of developmental biology. In Darwin’s day, studies of development went hand in hand with evolution, as when Alexander Kowalevsky (1866) first described the larval stage of the sea squirt as having clear chordate affinities, something that is far less clear when examining their adults. Darwin himself (1851a,b; 1854a,b) undertook extensive studies of barnacles, inspired in part by Burmeister’s description (1834) of their larval and metamorphic stages as allying them with the arthropods rather than the mollusks. If the intimate connection between development and evolution was so clear to Darwin and others 150 years ago, why is evolutionary developmental biology (or evo-devo) even considered a separate subject, and not completely inte- grated into the study of evolution? The answer seems to be historical. Although Darwin recognized the importance of development in understanding evolution, development was largely ignored by the architects of the 20th-century codifica- tion of evolutionary biology known as the modern evolutionary synthesis.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin and Evolution of Arthropods Graham E
    INSIGHT REVIEW NATURE|Vol 457|12 February 2009|doi:10.1038/nature07890 The origin and evolution of arthropods Graham E. Budd1 & Maximilian J. Telford2 The past two decades have witnessed profound changes in our understanding of the evolution of arthropods. Many of these insights derive from the adoption of molecular methods by systematists and developmental biologists, prompting a radical reordering of the relationships among extant arthropod classes and their closest non-arthropod relatives, and shedding light on the developmental basis for the origins of key characteristics. A complementary source of data is the discovery of fossils from several spectacular Cambrian faunas. These fossils form well-characterized groupings, making the broad pattern of Cambrian arthropod systematics increasingly consensual. The arthropods are one of the most familiar and ubiquitous of all ani- Arthropods are monophyletic mal groups. They have far more species than any other phylum, yet Arthropods encompass a great diversity of animal taxa known from the living species are merely the surviving branches of a much greater the Cambrian to the present day. The four living groups — myriapods, diversity of extinct forms. One group of crustacean arthropods, the chelicerates, insects and crustaceans — are known collectively as the barnacles, was studied extensively by Charles Darwin. But the origins Euarthropoda. They are united by a set of distinctive features, most and the evolution of arthropods in general, embedded in what is now notably the clear segmentation of their bodies, a sclerotized cuticle and known as the Cambrian explosion, were a source of considerable con- jointed appendages. Even so, their great diversity has led to consider- cern to him, and he devoted a substantial and anxious section of On able debate over whether they had single (monophyletic) or multiple the Origin of Species1 to discussing this subject: “For instance, I cannot (polyphyletic) origins from a soft-bodied, legless ancestor.
    [Show full text]
  • Xenacoelomorpha's Significance for Understanding Bilaterian Evolution
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com ScienceDirect Xenacoelomorpha’s significance for understanding bilaterian evolution Andreas Hejnol and Kevin Pang The Xenacoelomorpha, with its phylogenetic position as sister biology models are the fruitfly Drosophila melanogaster and group of the Nephrozoa (Protostomia + Deuterostomia), plays the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, in which basic prin- a key-role in understanding the evolution of bilaterian cell types ciples of developmental processes have been studied in and organ systems. Current studies of the morphological and great detail. It might be because the field of evolutionary developmental diversity of this group allow us to trace the developmental biology — EvoDevo — has its origin in evolution of different organ systems within the group and to developmental biology and not evolutionary biology that reconstruct characters of the most recent common ancestor of species under investigation are often called ‘model spe- Xenacoelomorpha. The disparity of the clade shows that there cies’. Criteria for selected representative species are cannot be a single xenacoelomorph ‘model’ species and primarily the ease of access to collected material and strategic sampling is essential for understanding the evolution their ability to be cultivated in the lab [1]. In some cases, of major traits. With this strategy, fundamental insights into the a supposedly larger number of ancestral characters or a evolution of molecular mechanisms and their role in shaping dominant role in ecosystems have played an additional animal organ systems can be expected in the near future. role in selecting model species. These arguments were Address used to attract sufficient funding for genome sequencing Sars International Centre for Marine Molecular Biology, University of and developmental studies that are cost-intensive inves- Bergen, Thormøhlensgate 55, 5008 Bergen, Norway tigations.
    [Show full text]
  • Cambrian Small Bilaterian Fossils from 40 to 55 Million Years Before
    Supporting Online Material Systematic Paleontology Genus Vernanimalcula gen. et sp. nov. Etymology: Generic name denotes (from Latin) small spring animal (i.e., after Snowball Earth winter). Diagnosis: Small triploblastic bilaterian animal (about 120-180 microns in length), with an oval-shaped dorsal view. The alimentary canal is differentiated into a pharynx, which is muscular and multi-layered (three, possibly four single cell layers), running anterior- posterior with a collared mouth situating ventrally near anterior margin of the body. The pharynx opens into an expanded stomach/intestine, which terminates at the posterior end with an anus. Alimentary canal is flanked by paired coeloms, which are bounded with single-cell mesodermal layers. Externally the mesodermal layers are covered with ectoderm layers and internally they abut the endodermal wall of the alimentary tract. The body is convex dorsally and there are at least three pits on each side of the outer surface. These pits are floored with small cells. The ventral surface is interpreted to be flat. Type species: Vernanimalcula guizhouena gen. et sp. nov. (Fig. 1 A; Table 1). Etymology: Specific name refers to Guizhou Province, where the fossils came from. Holotype: The holotype represents a complete animal preserved; the section runs nearly parallel to the ventral surface of the animal. Material: Five specimens, all of which are nearly complete. Specimen numbers are given in Table 1. Diagnosis: Same as the generic diagnosis. This and the other specimens described are housed at the Early Life Research Center in Chengjiang, Yunnan, China. Locality and Stratigraphy: Badoushan, Weng'an County, Central Guizhou; from ~2-m- thick basal black bituminous phosphorite layer of the Precambrian lower Weng'an Phosphate Member, Doushantuo Formation.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Homology and Multiple-Sequence Alignment: an Analysis of Concepts and Practice
    CSIRO PUBLISHING Australian Systematic Botany, 2015, 28,46–62 LAS Johnson Review http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/SB15001 Molecular homology and multiple-sequence alignment: an analysis of concepts and practice David A. Morrison A,D, Matthew J. Morgan B and Scot A. Kelchner C ASystematic Biology, Uppsala University, Norbyvägen 18D, Uppsala 75236, Sweden. BCSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, GPO Box 1700, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia. CDepartment of Biology, Utah State University, 5305 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322-5305, USA. DCorresponding author. Email: [email protected] Abstract. Sequence alignment is just as much a part of phylogenetics as is tree building, although it is often viewed solely as a necessary tool to construct trees. However, alignment for the purpose of phylogenetic inference is primarily about homology, as it is the procedure that expresses homology relationships among the characters, rather than the historical relationships of the taxa. Molecular homology is rather vaguely defined and understood, despite its importance in the molecular age. Indeed, homology has rarely been evaluated with respect to nucleotide sequence alignments, in spite of the fact that nucleotides are the only data that directly represent genotype. All other molecular data represent phenotype, just as do morphology and anatomy. Thus, efforts to improve sequence alignment for phylogenetic purposes should involve a more refined use of the homology concept at a molecular level. To this end, we present examples of molecular-data levels at which homology might be considered, and arrange them in a hierarchy. The concept that we propose has many levels, which link directly to the developmental and morphological components of homology.
    [Show full text]
  • Radial Symmetry Or Bilateral Symmetry Or "Spherical Symmetry"
    Symmetry in biology is the balanced distribution of duplicate body parts or shapes. The body plans of most multicellular organisms exhibit some form of symmetry, either radial symmetry or bilateral symmetry or "spherical symmetry". A small minority exhibit no symmetry (are asymmetric). In nature and biology, symmetry is approximate. For example, plant leaves, while considered symmetric, will rarely match up exactly when folded in half. Radial symmetry These organisms resemble a pie where several cutting planes produce roughly identical pieces. An organism with radial symmetry exhibits no left or right sides. They have a top and a bottom (dorsal and ventral surface) only. Animals Symmetry is important in the taxonomy of animals; animals with bilateral symmetry are classified in the taxon Bilateria, which is generally accepted to be a clade of the kingdom Animalia. Bilateral symmetry means capable of being split into two equal parts so that one part is a mirror image of the other. The line of symmetry lies dorso-ventrally and anterior-posteriorly. Most radially symmetric animals are symmetrical about an axis extending from the center of the oral surface, which contains the mouth, to the center of the opposite, or aboral, end. This type of symmetry is especially suitable for sessile animals such as the sea anemone, floating animals such as jellyfish, and slow moving organisms such as sea stars (see special forms of radial symmetry). Animals in the phyla cnidaria and echinodermata exhibit radial symmetry (although many sea anemones and some corals exhibit bilateral symmetry defined by a single structure, the siphonoglyph) (see Willmer, 1990).
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Homology and Multiple-Sequence Alignment: an Analysis of Concepts and Practice
    CSIRO PUBLISHING Australian Systematic Botany, 2015, 28, 46–62 LAS Johnson Review http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/SB15001 Molecular homology and multiple-sequence alignment: an analysis of concepts and practice David A. Morrison A,D, Matthew J. Morgan B and Scot A. Kelchner C ASystematic Biology, Uppsala University, Norbyvägen 18D, Uppsala 75236, Sweden. BCSIRO Ecosystem Sciences, GPO Box 1700, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia. CDepartment of Biology, Utah State University, 5305 Old Main Hill, Logan, UT 84322-5305, USA. DCorresponding author. Email: [email protected] Abstract. Sequence alignment is just as much a part of phylogenetics as is tree building, although it is often viewed solely as a necessary tool to construct trees. However, alignment for the purpose of phylogenetic inference is primarily about homology, as it is the procedure that expresses homology relationships among the characters, rather than the historical relationships of the taxa. Molecular homology is rather vaguely defined and understood, despite its importance in the molecular age. Indeed, homology has rarely been evaluated with respect to nucleotide sequence alignments, in spite of the fact that nucleotides are the only data that directly represent genotype. All other molecular data represent phenotype, just as do morphology and anatomy. Thus, efforts to improve sequence alignment for phylogenetic purposes should involve a more refined use of the homology concept at a molecular level. To this end, we present examples of molecular-data levels at which homology might be considered, and arrange them in a hierarchy. The concept that we propose has many levels, which link directly to the developmental and morphological components of homology.
    [Show full text]
  • The Snodgrass Tapes Evolution of the Arthropods Robert Evans Snodgrass Page 1 Figure 1
    The Snodgrass Tapes Evolution of the Arthropods The third of three lectures by the insect morphologist Robert Evans Snodgrass delivered to the Department of Entomology at the University of Maryland in 1960. Transcribed, assembled and annotated by Jeffrey W. Shultz Robert Evans Snodgrass Well, the subject today will be the evolution of the arthropods. But, of course, I'll have to admit to begin with that I don't really know the truth of the matter. So, judging from what facts you can get to together... I suppose at the present time that all .... evolution is accepted as a fact by all zoologists. And apparently the fundamentalists have given up trying to do anything about it. Yet it is a theory. And ... But it seems the idea of natural selection well- enough accounts for the physical evolution of animals; that is, certain genes produce the proper variations. But what bothers me about the ... about the evolution of the animals is how did the animal ever become such a com- plex assemblage of chemical substances. I've had a cold, but I guess I can talk through it. Every cell in the body, for example, has to have its own enzymes to do its work it's supposed to do. And all these activities have to be correlated and regulated by hormones, and hormones, again, are just chemical compounds. And, so, it seems to me that that's one of the problems of evolution yet is to find out how all of these chemical substances ever got together in the animal in the proper amount, in the proper places and [how they came] to do the things that they do do...
    [Show full text]