What does structure tell us about virus evolution?

Viruses are the most abundant life form and infect practically all organisms. Consequently, these obligate parasites are a major cause of human suffering and economic loss. The organization and origins of this enormous virosphere are profound open questions in biology. It has generally been considered that viruses infecting evolutionally widely separated organisms (e.g. bacteria and humans) are also distinct. However, recent research contradicts this picture. Structural analyses of virion architecture and coat protein topology have revealed unexpected similarities, not visible in sequence comparisons, suggesting a common origin for viruses that infect hosts residing in different domains of life (bacteria, archaea and eukarya).     

Molecular evolution inferred from small subunit rRNA sequences: what does it tell us about phylogenetic relationships and taxonomy of the parabasalids?

The Parabasala are a primitive group of protists divided into two classes: the trichomonads and the hypermastigids. Until recently, phylogeny and taxonomy of parabasalids were mainly based on the comparative analysis of morphological characters primarily linked to the development of their cytoskeleton. Recent use of molecular markers, such as small subunit (SSU) rRNA has led to now insights into the systematics of the Parabasala and other groups of prolists. An updated phylogeny based on SSU rRNA is provided and compared to that inferred from ultrastructural data. The SSU rRNA phylogeny contradicts the dogma equating simple characters with pumitive characters. Hypermastigids, possessing a hyperdeveloped cytoskeleton, exhibit the most basal emergence in the parabasalid lineage. Other observations emerge from the SSU rRNA analysis, such as the secondary loss of some cytoskeleton structures in all representatives of the Monocercomonadidae, the existence of secondarily free living taxa (reversibility of parasitism) and the evidence against the co-evolution of the endobiotic parabasalids and their animal hosts. According to phylogenies based on SSU rRNA, all the trichomonad families are not monophyletic groups, putting into question the validity of current taxonomic assignments. The precise branching order of some taxa remains unclear, but this issue can possibly be addressed by the molecular analysis of additional parabasalids. The goal of such additional analyses would be to propose, in a near future, a revision of the taxonomy of this group of protists that takes into account both molecular and morphological data.     

What can dolphins tell us about primate evolution?

Fifty-five million years ago, a furry, hoofed mammal about the size of a dog ventured into the shallow brackish remnant of the Tethys Sea and set its descendants on a path that would lead to their complete abandonment of the land. These early ancestors of cetaceans (dolphins, porpoises, and whales) thereafter set on an evolutionary course that is arguably the most unusual of any mammal that ever lived. Primates and cetaceans, because of their adaptation to exclusively different physical environments, have had essentially nothing to do with each other throughout their evolution as distinct orders. In fact, the closest phylogenetic relatives of cetaceans are even-toed ungulates.     

What does Drosophila genetics tell us about speciation?

Studies of hybrid inviability, sterility and 'speciation genes' in Drosophila have given insight into the genetic changes that result in reproductive isolation. Here, I survey some extraordinary and important advances in Drosophila speciation research. However, 'reproductive isolation' is not the same as 'speciation', and this Drosophila work has resulted in a lopsided view of speciation. In particular, Drosophila are not always well-suited to investigating ecological and other selection-driven primary causes of speciation in nature. Recent advances have made use of far less tractable, but more charismatic organisms, such as flowering plants, vertebrates and larger insects. Work with these organisms has complemented Drosophila studies of hybrid unfitness to provide a more complete understanding of speciation.     

What does fMRI tell us about neuronal activity?

In recent years, cognitive neuroscientists have taken great advantage of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as a non-invasive method of measuring neuronal activity in the human brain. But what exactly does fMRI tell us? We know that its signals arise from changes in local haemodynamics that, in turn, result from alterations in neuronal activity, but exactly how neuronal activity, haemodynamics and fMRI signals are related is unclear. It has been assumed that the fMRI signal is proportional to the local average neuronal activity, but many factors can influence the relationship between the two. A clearer understanding of how neuronal activity influences the fMRI signal is needed if we are correctly to interpret functional imaging data.     

What can whole genome expression data tell us about the ecology and evolution of personality?

Consistent individual differences in behaviour, aka personality, pose several evolutionary questions. For example, it is difficult to explain within-individual consistency in behaviour because behavioural plasticity is often advantageous. In addition, selection erodes heritable behavioural variation that is related to fitness, therefore we wish to know the mechanisms that can maintain between-individual variation in behaviour. In this paper, we argue that whole genome expression data can reveal new insights into the proximate mechanisms underlying personality, as well as its evolutionary consequences. After introducing the basics of whole genome expression analysis, we show how whole genome expression data can be used to understand whether behaviours in different contexts are affected by the same molecular mechanisms. We suggest strategies for using the power of genomics to understand what maintains behavioural variation, to study the evolution of behavioural correlations and to compare personality traits across diverse organisms.     

What does sexual trait FA tell us about stress?

There is widespread acceptance that fluctuating asymmetry (FA) increases under environmental and genetic stress. Fluctuating asymmetry in sexual traits is thought to be particularly sensitive to stress and to reflect genetic and phenotypic quality. Recent experimental studies show that the relationship between FA and stress is inconsistent, and there is little evidence that sexual traits are especially responsive to stress.     

What does feeding system morphology tell us about feeding?

Feeding is the set of behaviors whereby organisms acquire and process the energy required for survival and reproduction. Thus, feeding system morphology is presumably subject to selection to maintain or improve feeding performance. Relationships among feeding system morphology, feeding behavior, and diet not only explain the morphological diversity of extant primates, but can also be used to reconstruct feeding behavior and diet in fossil taxa. Dental morphology has long been known to reflect aspects of feeding behavior and diet but strong relationships of craniomandibular morphology to feeding behavior and diet have yet to be defined.     

Renal organogenesis: What can it tell us about renal repair and regeneration?

The increasing prevalence of chronic kidney disease in the absence of new treatment modalities has become a strong driver for innovation in nephrology. An increasing understanding of stem cell biology has kindled the prospects of regenerative options for kidney disease. However, the kidney itself is not a regenerative organ, as all the nephrons are formed during embryonic development. Here, we will investigate advances in the molecular genetics of renal organogenesis, including what this can tell us about lineage relationships, and discuss how this may serve to inform us about both the normal processes of renal repair and options for regenerative therapies.     

Fossils of parasites: what can the fossil record tell us about the evolution of parasitism?

Parasites are common in many ecosystems, yet because of their nature, they do not fossilise readily and are very rare in the geological record. This makes it challenging to study the evolutionary transition that led to the evolution of parasitism in different taxa. Most studies on the evolution of parasites are based on phylogenies of extant species that were constructed based on morphological and molecular data, but they give us an incomplete picture and offer little information on many important details of parasite–host interactions. The lack of fossil parasites also means we know very little about the roles that parasites played in ecosystems of the past even though it is known that parasites have significant influences on many ecosystems. The goal of this review is to bring attention to known fossils of parasites and parasitism, and provide a conceptual framework for how research on fossil parasites can develop in the future. Despite their rarity, there are some fossil parasites which have been described from different geological eras. These fossils include the free‐living stage of parasites, parasites which became fossilised with their hosts, parasite eggs and propagules in coprolites, and traces of pathology inflicted by parasites on the host's body. Judging from the fossil record, while there were some parasite–host relationships which no longer exist in the present day, many parasite taxa which are known from the fossil record seem to have remained relatively unchanged in their general morphology and their patterns of host association over tens or even hundreds of millions of years. It also appears that major evolutionary and ecological transitions throughout the history of life on Earth coincided with the appearance of certain parasite taxa, as the appearance of new host groups also provided new niches for potential parasites. As such, fossil parasites can provide additional data regarding the ecology of their extinct hosts, since many parasites have specific life cycles and transmission modes which reflect certain aspects of the host's ecology. The study of fossil parasites can be conducted using existing techniques in palaeontology and palaeoecology, and microscopic examination of potential material such as coprolites may uncover more fossil evidence of parasitism. However, I also urge caution when interpreting fossils as examples of parasites or parasitism‐induced traces. I point out a number of cases where parasitism has been spuriously attributed to some fossil specimens which, upon re‐examination, display traits which are just as (if not more) likely to be found in free‐living taxa. The study of parasite fossils can provide a more complete picture of the ecosystems and evolution of life throughout Earth's history.     

Review and analysis of the surveys for natural enemies of Mimosa pigra: What does it tell us about surveys for broadly distributed hosts?

Mimosa pigra L. (Mimosaceae), a serious weed in Australia and Asia, has been the target of a biological control project for 25 years. This woody legume occurs naturally in all tropical American countries from Mexico to Argentina and on many Caribbean islands. In this paper, we analysed the results of surveys for natural enemies of M. pigra conducted in seven countries by several different collectors and which revealed 420 species of insects and five of fungi. We assessed the survey effort relative to the natural distribution of the host-plant to show that large areas of the natural distribution were not covered. We examined the known distribution of the natural enemies to show that most natural enemies occur over the majority of the range of the host, although the Isthmus of Panama is a barrier to many species. This indicates that few potential agents were missed. We show species accumulation curves for three sites to estimate the number of visits required to find most species at a site. Although the species accumulation curves continued to rise, even after 28 collections and 101 insects found at one site, the species utilised for biological control were found relatively early. We expect that these general conclusions (that those insects with potential for biological control are widely distributed and relatively quickly discovered) are applicable to biological control surveys of any target that occurs continuously over a wide geographic range, but possibly not to targets that occupy disjunct distributions.     

What does the fruitless gene tell us about nature vs. nurture in the sex life of Drosophila?

The fruitless (fru) gene in Drosophila has been proposed to play a master regulator role in the formation of neural circuitries for male courtship behavior, which is typically considered to be an innate behavior composed of a fixed action pattern as generated by the central pattern generator. However, recent studies have shed light on experience-dependent changes and sensory-input-guided plasticity in courtship behavior. For example, enhanced male-male courtship, a fru mutant “hallmark,” disappears when fru-mutant males are raised in isolation. The fact that neural fru expression is induced by neural activities in the adult invites the supposition that Fru as a chromatin regulator mediates experience-dependent epigenetic modification, which underlies the neural and behavioral plasticity.     

What can Caenorhabditis elegans tell us about the nuclear envelope?

The nuclear envelope (NE) of the eukaryotic cell provides an essential barrier that separates the nuclear compartment from the cytoplasm. In addition, the NE is involved in essential functions such as nuclear stability, regulation of gene expression, centrosome separation and nuclear migration and positioning. In metazoa the NE breaks down and re-assembles around the segregated chromatids during each cell division. In this review we discuss the molecular constituents of the Caenorhabditis elegans NE and describe their role in post-mitotic NE re-formation, as well as the usefulness of C. elegans as an in vivo system for analyzing NE dynamics.     

What does morphology tell us about orchid relationships?—a cladistic analysis

A cladistic analysis of Orchidaceae was undertaken for 98 genera using 71 morphological apomorphies based on a reconsideration of previous character analyses and newly discovered variation. The equally weighted analysis found 60 000 most parsimonious trees with low consistency (CI = 0.29) but high retention (RI = 0.83). The strict consensus reveals a significant amount of structure, and most traditionally recognized subfamilies are supported as monophyletic, including the Apostasioideae, Cypripedioideae, Spiranthoideae, and Epidendroideae. Orchidoideae in the broad sense are paraphyletic, giving rise to spiranthoids. Vanilloids are sister to epidendroids, although exhibiting several states otherwise found only in clearly basal groups, such as Apostasioideae. The nonvandoid epidendroids are poorly resolved, due to a high degree of homoplasy. The vandoids appear to be monophyletic, contrary to recent molecular evidence, possibly due to repeated parallel development of the vandoid character suite. The importance of vegetative characters as evidence putatively independent from floral features is demonstrated in the placement of Tropidia. Implied weighting analysis of these data resulted in similar patterns at high levels, although the Orchidoideae and Spiranthoideae may each be monophyletic and the nonvandoid epidendroids are more resolved. The high degree of structure implied in previous orchid classifications must be reconsidered, given the poor resolution at lower levels in the present trees.