How different types of pattern formation mechanisms affect the evolution of form and development

Here we investigate how development and evolution can affect each other by exploring what kind of phenotypic variation is produced by different types of developmental mechanisms. A limited number of developmental mechanisms are capable of pattern formation in development. Two main types have been identified. In morphodynamic mechanisms, induction events and morphogenetic processes, such as simple growth, act at the same time. In morphostatic mechanisms, induction events happen before morphogenetic mechanisms, and thus growth cannot influence the induction of a pattern. We present a study of the variational properties of these developmental mechanisms that can help to understand how and why a developmental mechanism may become involved in the evolution and development of a particular morphological structure. Using existing models of pattern formation in teeth, an extensive simulation analysis of the phenotypic variation produced by different types of developmental mechanisms is performed. The studied properties include the amount and diversity of the phenotypic variation produced, the complexity of the phenotypic variation produced, and the relationship between phenotype and genotype. These variational properties are so different between different types of mechanisms that the relative involvement of these types of mechanisms in evolutionary innovation and in different stages of development can be estimated. In addition, type of mechanism affects the tempo and mode of morphological evolution. These results suggest that the basic principles by which development is organized can influence the likelihood of morphological evolution.     

MODELING PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY IN GROWTH TRAJECTORIES: A STATISTICAL FRAMEWORK

Phenotypic plasticity, that is multiple phenotypes produced by a single genotype in response to environmental change, has been thought to play an important role in evolution and speciation. Historically, knowledge about phenotypic plasticity has resulted from the analysis of static traits measured at a single time point. New insight into the adaptive nature of plasticity can be gained by an understanding of how organisms alter their developmental processes in a range of environments. Recent advances in statistical modeling of functional data and developmental genetics allow us to construct a dynamic framework of plastic response in developmental form and pattern. Under this framework, development, genetics, and evolution can be synthesized through statistical bridges to better address how evolution results from phenotypic variation in the process of development via genetic alterations.     

The role of post-natal ontogeny in the evolution of phenotypic diversity in Podarcis lizards

Understanding the role of the developmental pathways in shaping phenotypic diversity allows appreciating in full the processes influencing and constraining morphological change. Podarcis lizards demonstrate extraordinary morphological variability that likely originated in short evolutionary time. Using geometric morphometrics and a broad suite of statistical tests, we explored the role of developmental mechanisms such as growth rate change, ontogenetic divergence/convergence/parallelism as well as morphological expression of heterochronic processes in mediating the formation of their phenotypic diversity during the post-natal ontogeny. We identified hypermorphosis - the prolongation of growth along the same trajectory - as the process responsible for both intersexual and interspecific morphological differentiation. Albeit the common allometric pattern observed in both sexes of any species constrains and canalizes their cephalic scales variation in a fixed portion of the phenotypic space, the extended growth experienced by males and some species allows them to achieve peramorphic morphologies. Conversely, the intrasexual phenotypic diversity is accounted for by non-allometric processes that drive the extensive morphological dispersion throughout their ontogenetic trajectories. This study suggests a model of how simple heterochronic perturbations can produce phenotypic variation, and thus potential for further evolutionary change, even within a strictly constrained developmental pathway.     

Developmental structuring of phenotypic variation: A case study with a cellular automata model of ontogeny

Developmental mechanisms not only produce an organismal phenotype, but they also structure the way genetic variation maps to phenotypic variation. Here, we revisit a computational model for the evolution of ontogeny based on cellular automata, in which evolution regularly discovered two alternative mechanisms for achieving a selected phenotype, one showing high modularity, the other showing morphological integration. We measure a primary variational property of the systems, their distribution of fitness effects of mutation. We find that the modular ontogeny shows the evolution of mutational robustness and ontogenic simplification, while the integrated ontogeny does not. We discuss the wider use of this methodology on other computational models of development as well as real organisms.     

Developmental interactions and the constituents of quantitative variation

Development is the process by which genotypes are transformed into phenotypes. Consequently, development determines the relationship between allelic and phenotypic variation in a population and, therefore, the patterns of quantitative genetic variation and covariation of traits. Understanding the developmental basis of quantitative traits may lead to insights into the origin and evolution of quantitative genetic variation, the evolutionary fate of populations, and, more generally, the relationship between development and evolution. Herein, we assume a hierarchical, modular structure of trait development and consider how epigenetic interactions among modules during ontogeny affect patterns of phenotypic and genetic variation. We explore two developmental models, one in which the epigenetic interactions between modules result in additive effects on character expression and a second model in which these epigenetic interactions produce nonadditive effects. Using a phenotype landscape approach, we show how changes in the developmental processes underlying phenotypic expression can alter the magnitude and pattern of quantitative genetic variation. Additive epigenetic effects influence genetic variances and covariances, but allow trait means to evolve independently of the genetic variances and covariances, so that phenotypic evolution can proceed without changing the genetic covariance structure that determines future evolutionary response. Nonadditive epigenetic effects, however, can lead to evolution of genetic variances and covariances as the mean phenotype evolves. Our model suggests that an understanding of multivariate evolution can be considerably enriched by knowledge of the mechanistic basis of character development.     

Craniofacial variability and modularity in macaques and mice

Evolutionary developmental biology of primates will be driven largely by the developmental biology of the house mouse. Inferences from how known developmental perturbations produce phenotypic effects in model organisms, such as mice, to how the same perturbations would affect craniofacial form in primates must be informed by comparisons of phenotypic variation and variability in mice and the primate species of interest. We use morphometric methods to compare patterns of cranial variability in homologous datasets obtained for two strains of laboratory mice and rhesus macaques. C57BL/6J represents a common genetic background for transgenic models. A/WySnJ mice exhibit altered facial morphology which results from reduction in the growth of the maxillary process during formation of the face. This is relevant to evolutionary changes in facial prognathism in nonhuman primate and human evolution. Rhesus macaques represent a nonhuman primate about which a great deal of phenotypic and genetic information is available. We find significant similarities in covariation patterns between the C57BL/6J mice and macaques. Among-trait variation in genetic and phenotypic variances are fairly concordant among the three groups, but among-trait variation in developmental stability is not. Finally, analysis of modularity based on phenotypic and genetic correlations did not reveal a consistent pattern in the three groups. We discuss the implications of these results for the study of evolutionary developmental biology of primates and outline a research strategy for integrating mouse genomics and developmental biology into this emerging field.     

Evolvability of cell specification mechanisms

The architecture of gene action during development is relevant to phenotypic evolution as it links genotype to morphological phenotype. Analysis of development at the level of cell fate specification mechanisms illuminates some of the properties of developmental evolution. In this article, we first review examples of evolutionary change in mechanisms of cell fate specification, with an emphasis on evolution in the dependence on inductive signaling and on evolution of the mechanisms that result in spatial asymmetries. We then focus on properties of development that bias possible phenotypic change and present how the distribution of phenotypes that are available by mutational change of the starting genotype can be experimentally tested by systematic mutagenesis. We finally discuss ways in which selection pressures on phenotypes can be inferred from a comparison of the phenotypic spectrum found on mutation with that found in the wild.     

THE EVOLUTION OF PHENOTYPIC CORRELATIONS AND “DEVELOPMENTAL MEMORY”

Development introduces structured correlations among traits that may constrain or bias the distribution of phenotypes produced. Moreover, when suitable heritable variation exists, natural selection may alter such constraints and correlations, affecting the phenotypic variation available to subsequent selection. However, exactly how the distribution of phenotypes produced by complex developmental systems can be shaped by past selective environments is poorly understood. Here we investigate the evolution of a network of recurrent nonlinear ontogenetic interactions, such as a gene regulation network, in various selective scenarios. We find that evolved networks of this type can exhibit several phenomena that are familiar in cognitive learning systems. These include formation of a distributed associative memory that can “store” and “recall” multiple phenotypes that have been selected in the past, recreate complete adult phenotypic patterns accurately from partial or corrupted embryonic phenotypes, and “generalize” (by exploiting evolved developmental modules) to produce new combinations of phenotypic features. We show that these surprising behaviors follow from an equivalence between the action of natural selection on phenotypic correlations and associative learning, well‐understood in the context of neural networks. This helps to explain how development facilitates the evolution of high‐fitness phenotypes and how this ability changes over evolutionary time.     

Morphology and behaviour: functional links in development and evolution

Development and evolution of animal behaviour and morphology are frequently addressed independently, as reflected in the dichotomy of disciplines dedicated to their study distinguishing object of study (morphology versus behaviour) and perspective (ultimate versus proximate). Although traits are known to develop and evolve semi-independently, they are matched together in development and evolution to produce a unique functional phenotype. Here I highlight similarities shared by both traits, such as the decisive role played by the environment for their ontogeny. Considering the widespread developmental and functional entanglement between both traits, many cases of adaptive evolution are better understood when proximate and ultimate explanations are integrated. A field integrating these perspectives is evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo), which studies the developmental basis of phenotypic diversity. Ultimate aspects in evo-devo studies--which have mostly focused on morphological traits--could become more apparent when behaviour, 'the integrator of form and function', is integrated into the same framework of analysis. Integrating a trait such as behaviour at a different level in the biological hierarchy will help to better understand not only how behavioural diversity is produced, but also how levels are connected to produce functional phenotypes and how these evolve. A possible framework to accommodate and compare form and function at different levels of the biological hierarchy is outlined. At the end, some methodological issues are discussed.     

How a growing organismal perspective is adding new depth to integrative studies of morphological evolution

Over the past half century, the field of Evolutionary Developmental Biology, or Evo‐devo, has integrated diverse fields of biology into a more synthetic understanding of morphological diversity. This has resulted in numerous insights into how development can evolve and reciprocally influence morphological evolution, as well as generated several novel theoretical areas. Although comparative by default, there remains a great gap in our understanding of adaptive morphological diversification and how developmental mechanisms influence the shape and pattern of phenotypic variation. Herein we highlight areas of research that are in the process of filling this void, and areas, if investigated more fully, that will add new insights into the diversification of morphology. At the centre of our discussion is an explicit awareness of organismal biology. Here we discuss an organismal framework that is supported by three distinct pillars. First, there is a need for Evo‐devo to adopt a high‐resolution phylogenetic approach in the study of morphological variation and its developmental underpinnings. Secondly, we propose that to understand the dynamic nature of morphological evolution, investigators need to give more explicit attention to the processes that generate evolutionarily relevant variation at the population level. Finally, we emphasize the need to address more thoroughly the processes that structure variation at micro‐ and macroevolutionary scales including modularity, morphological integration, constraint, and plasticity. We illustrate the power of these three pillars using numerous examples from both invertebrates and vertebrates to emphasize that many of these approaches are already present within the field, but have yet to be formally integrated into many research programs. We feel that the most exciting new insights will come where the traditional experimental approaches to Evo‐devo are integrated more thoroughly with the principles of this organismal framework.     

Developmental and genetic mechanisms for evolutionary diversification of serial repeats: eyespot size in Bicyclus anynana butterflies

Serially repeated pattern elements on butterfly wings offer the opportunity for integrating genetic, developmental, and functional aspects towards understanding morphological diversification and the evolution of individuality. We use captive populations of Bicyclus anynana butterflies, an emerging model in evolutionary developmental biology, to explore the genetic and developmental basis of compartmentalized changes in eyespot patterns. There is much variation for different aspects of eyespot morphology, and knowledge about the genetic pathways and developmental processes involved in eyespot formation. Also, despite the strong correlations across all eyespots in one butterfly, B. anynana shows great potential for independent changes in the size of individual eyespots. It is, however, unclear to what extent the genetic and developmental processes underlying eyespot formation change in a localized manner to enable such individualization. We use micromanipulations of developing wings to dissect the contribution of different components of eyespot development to quantitative differences in eyespot size on one wing surface. Reciprocal transplants of presumptive eyespot foci between artificial selection lines and controls suggest that while localized antagonistic changes in eyespot size rely mostly on localized changes in focal signal strength, concerted changes depend greatly on epidermal response sensitivities. This potentially reflects differences between the signal-response components of eyespot formation in the degrees of compartmentalization and/or the temporal pattern of selection. We also report on the phenotypic analysis of a number of mutant stocks demonstrating how single alleles can affect different eyespots in concert or independently, and thus contribute to the individualization of serially repeated traits.     

Cryptic variation in butterfly eyespot development: the importance of sample size in gene expression studies

Previous studies have shown that development can be robust to variation in parameters such as the timing or level of gene expression. This leads to the prediction that natural populations should be able to host developmental variation that has little phenotypic effect. Cryptic variation is of particular interest because it can result in selectable phenotypes when "released" by environmental or genetic factors. Currently, however, we have little idea of how variation is distributed between genes or over time in pattern formation processes. Here we survey expression of Notch (N), Spalt (Sal), and Engrailed (En) during butterfly eyespot determination to better understand how pattern formation may vary within a population. We observed substantial heterochronic variance in the progress of spatial expression patterns for all three proteins, suggesting some degree of developmental buffering in eyespot development. Peak variance for different proteins was found at both early and late stages of development, contrasting with previous models suggesting that the distribution of variance should be more temporally focused during pattern formation. We speculate that our observations are representative of a standing reservoir of cryptic variation that may contribute to phenotypic evolution under certain circumstances. Our results also provide a strong cautionary message that gene expression studies with limited sample sizes can be positively misleading in terms of inferring expression pattern time series, as well as for making cross-species phylogenetic comparisons.     

Phenotypic Variability: Its Components, Measurement and Underlying Developmental Processes

Variability contrasts with variation in that variability describes the potential for variation, not simply the expressed variation. The power of studying variability lies in creating a conceptual framework around which the relationship between the genotype and phenotype can be understood. Here, we attempt to demonstrate the importance of phenotypic variability, how it structures variation, and how fundamental developmental processes structure variability. Given the broad scope of this topic, we focus on three widely studied properties of variability: canalization, developmental stability and morphological integration. We have organized the paper to emphasize the importance of differentiating between the theory surrounding these components of phenotypic variability, their measurement and the biological factors surrounding their expression. First, we define these properties of variability, how they relate to each other and to variability as a whole. Second, we summarize the common methods of measurement for canalization, developmental stability and morphological integration and the reasoning behind these methods. Finally, we focus on jaw development as an example of how the basic processes of development affect variability and the resultant variation, with emphasis on how processes at all levels of the organismal hierarchy interact with one another and contribute to phenotypic variability.     

Synthetic circuits reveal how mechanisms of gene regulatory networks constrain evolution

Phenotypic variation is the raw material of adaptive Darwinian evolution. The phenotypic variation found in organismal development is biased towards certain phenotypes, but the molecular mechanisms behind such biases are still poorly understood. Gene regulatory networks have been proposed as one cause of constrained phenotypic variation. However, most pertinent evidence is theoretical rather than experimental. Here, we study evolutionary biases in two synthetic gene regulatory circuits expressed in Escherichia coli that produce a gene expression stripe—a pivotal pattern in embryonic development. The two parental circuits produce the same phenotype, but create it through different regulatory mechanisms. We show that mutations cause distinct novel phenotypes in the two networks and use a combination of experimental measurements, mathematical modelling and DNA sequencing to understand why mutations bring forth only some but not other novel gene expression phenotypes. Our results reveal that the regulatory mechanisms of networks restrict the possible phenotypic variation upon mutation. Consequently, seemingly equivalent networks can indeed be distinct in how they constrain the outcome of further evolution.     

Developmental processes regulate craniofacial variation in disease and evolution

Variation in development mediates phenotypic differences observed in evolution and disease. Although the mechanisms underlying phenotypic variation are still largely unknown, recent research suggests that variation in developmental processes may play a key role. Developmental processes mediate genotype–phenotype relationships and consequently play an important role regulating phenotypes. In this review, we provide an example of how shared and interacting developmental processes may explain convergence of phenotypes in spliceosomopathies and ribosomopathies. These data also suggest a shared pathway to disease treatment. We then discuss three major mechanisms that contribute to variation in developmental processes: genetic background (gene–gene interactions), gene–environment interactions, and developmental stochasticity. Finally, we comment on evolutionary alterations to developmental processes, and the evolution of disease buffering mechanisms.     

On the origins of morphological disparity and its diverse developmental bases

It has been repeatedly claimed that morphological novelties are an unresolved problem in evolutionary theory. Several definitions of novelty exist but most emphasize that novelties imply qualitative changes on the phenotype and not the quantitative gradual changes favored in the neo-Darwinian approach to evolutionary theory. This article discusses how the concept of novelty is used to describe aspects of morphological evolution that are not satisfactorily explained under the modern synthesis. In this article, it is suggested that there is a repertoire of morphological changes rather than two discrete qualitatively different types of morphological change. How these different types of morphological changes can be understood from the diversity of developmental mechanisms existing in animal development is explored. Specifically, it is proposed that animal morphology and its variation can be understood from the spatial patterns produced by a set of basic developmental mechanisms and their combination. Some specific examples of these kinds of morphologic changes are explained.     

Butterfly wings: the evolution of development of colour patterns

The diversity in colour patterns on butterfly wings provides great potential for understanding how developmental mechanisms may be modulated in the evolution of adaptive traits. In particular, we discuss concentric eyespot patterns, which have been shown by surgical experiments to be formed in response to signals from a central focus. Seasonal polyphenism shows how alternate phenotypes can develop through environmental sensitivity mediated by ecdysteroid hormones, whereas artificial selection and single gene mutants demonstrate genetic variation influencing the number, shape, size, position, and colour composition of the eyespots. The expression patterns of the regulatory gene Distal-less reveal that these changes can arise at several different developmental stages, and the phenotypes indicate that some forms of changed pattern may occur much more readily than others. Further study of the genes, of the developmental mechanisms, and of the functions of the patterns will provide novel insights about the evolution of morphological diversity. BioEssays 21:391–401, 1999. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

Process heterochronies in endochondral ossification

Heterochrony, evolutionary changes in developmental rates and timing, is a key concept in the construction of a synthesis of development and evolution. Heterochronic changes in vertebrate evolution have traditionally been identified through plesiomorphic-apomorphic comparisons of bone growth. This methodological framework assumes that observed heterochronies are the outcome of dissociations of developmental processes in time. Recent findings of non-heterochronic developmental changes underlying morphological heterochrony invalidate this assumption. In this paper, a function for bone growth (at the organ level) has been mathematically deduced from the underlying developmental mechanisms. The temporal domain of the model spans from the time at maximum growth rate, after the formation of growth plates, to the time at atrophy of the proliferating stratum of cells. Three organizational levels were considered: (a) cell kinetics of endochondral ossification, (b) variation of bone growth rates and (c) variation of accumulated bone growth with increasing age. This quantitative model provides an excellent tool to deal with the problem of the developmental basis of morphological change. I have modelled potential evolutionary changes on the system at different levels of biological organization. This new framework involves an epistemological shift in heterochronic analysis from a pattern-oriented inductive way to a process-oriented deductive way. The analysis of the relationships between the evolutionary alterations of endochondral ossification and the morphological expression of these changes reveals that observed pattern heterochronies can be the outcome of different process heterochronies. Moreover, I discuss at length the heteroposic hypothesis, that evolutionary changes in the tight regulation of the amount of protein synthesized by a cell population during development would underlie acceleration or deceleration in cases of evolutionary changes in the initial number of proliferating cells at growth plates. Future research on the genetic basis of process heterochronies and heteroposies will complete our understanding of these evolutionary phenomena.     

Morphometrics and the role of the phenotype in studies of the evolution of developmental mechanisms

Developmental mechanisms are usually assumed to evolve by natural selection of the morphological traits they produce. Therefore, information on phenotypic traits is an important component of comparative studies of development. Morphometrics permits the rigorous quantitative analysis of variation in organismal size and shape, and is increasingly being used in developmental contexts. The new methods of morphometrics combine a geometric concept of shape with the procedures of multivariate statistics, and constitute a powerful and flexible set of tools for analyzing morphological variation. This paper briefly reviews these methods and provides examples of their application in studies of genetic variation and developmental modularity. The results of morphometric analyses can be readily interpreted in relation to the geometry and anatomical structure of the parts under study. Genetic studies of shape in the mouse mandible found two recurrent patterns in environmental and genetic variation from different origins, suggesting that the development system 'channels' the phenotypic expression of variation in similar ways. Moreover, by analyzing the correlations of left-right asymmetries of morphometric traits, it is possible to delimit the spatial extent of developmental modules. These methods complement the experimental approaches of developmental biology and genetics, and can be expected to be especially fruitful in combination with them.