Differences in the selection response of serially repeated color pattern characters: Standing variation,development, and evolution

Background  

There is spectacular morphological diversity in nature but lineages typically display a limited range of phenotypes. Because developmental processes generate the phenotypic variation that fuels natural selection, they are a likely source of evolutionary biases, facilitating some changes and limiting others. Although shifts in developmental regulation are associated with morphological differences between taxa, it is unclear how underlying mechanisms affect the rate and direction of evolutionary change within populations under selection.     

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.     

Morphological interpretation of darwinism

The development of evolutionary theory requires the resolution of the problem of relationships between random and regular processes in historical development of biological systems. According to the theory of natural selection, ecological factors play a leading role in evolution. Variations are nondirectional, unpredictable, and provide chaotic diversity of variants, only some of which are potentially useful. However, based on random processes, new variants that are useful for organisms and remain adaptive significance in various ecological situations are infrequent. At the same time, morphology demonstrates certain evolutionary patterns. The morphological approach takes into account the role in evolution of structural features of organism and social systems and evolutionary significance of “constructive technologies,” which distinguish morphological interpretation of evolutionary processes. The constructive and evolutionary patterns revealed in biological systems provide the basis for morphological interpretation of the principle of natural selection: both natural and artificial selection is interaction between social systems (populations, ecosystems, biogeocoenoses) and organisms composing them.     

The scale independence of evolution

SUMMARY In this paper, I argue that the ultimate causes of morphological, and hence developmental, evolution are scale independent. In other words, micro- and macroevolutionary patterns show fundamental similarities and therefore are most simply explained as being caused by the same kinds of evolutionary forces. I begin by examining the evolution of single lineages and argue that dynamics of adaptive evolution are the same for bacteria in test-tube evolution experiments and fossil lineages. Similarly, I argue that the essential features of adaptive radiations large and small can be attributed to conventional forces such as mutation and diversifying natural selection due to competition. I then address recent claims that the molecular features of metazoan development are the result of clade-level selection for evolvability, and suggest that these features can be more easily explained by conventional individual-level selection for the suppression of deleterious pleiotropic effects. Finally, I ask what must be known if we are to understand the ultimate causes of molecular and developmental diversity.     

ADAPTIVE RADIATIONS,ECOLOGICAL SPECIALIZATION,AND THE EVOLUTIONARY INTEGRATION OF COMPLEX MORPHOLOGICAL STRUCTURES

The evolutionary integration of complex morphological structures is a macroevolutionary pattern in which morphogenetic components evolve in a coordinated fashion, which can result from the interplay among processes of developmental, genetic integration, and different types of selection. We tested hypotheses of ecological versus developmental factors underlying patterns of within‐species and evolutionary integration in the mandible of phyllostomid bats, during the most impressive ecological and morphological radiation among mammals. Shape variation of mandibular morphogenetic components was associated with diet, and the transition of integration patterns from developmental to within‐species to evolutionary was examined. Within‐species (as a proxy to genetic) integration in different lineages resembled developmental integration regardless of diet specialization, however, evolutionary integration patterns reflected selection in different mandibular components. For dietary specializations requiring extensive functional changes in mastication patterns or biting, such as frugivores and sanguivores, the evolutionary integration pattern was not associated with expected within‐species or developmental integration. On the other hand, specializations with lower mastication demands or without major functional reorganization (such as nectarivores and carnivores), presented evolutionary integration patterns similar to the expected developmental pattern. These results show that evolutionary integration patterns are largely a result of independent selection on specific components regardless of developmental modules.     

Evolution and development of the primate limb skeleton

The order Primates is composed of many closely related lineages, each having a relatively well established phylogeny supported by both the fossil record and molecular data. 1 Primate evolution is characterized by a series of adaptive radiations beginning early in the Cenozoic era. Studies of these radiations have uncovered two major trends. One is that substantial amounts of morphological diversity have been produced over short periods of evolutionary time. 2 The other is that consistent and repeated patterns (variational tendencies 3 ) are detected. Taxa within clades, such as the strepsirrhines of Madagascar and the platyrrhines of the Neotropics, have diversified in body size, substrate preference, and diet. 2 , 4 - 6 The diversification of adaptive strategies within such clades is accompanied by repeated patterns of change in cheiridial proportions 7 , 8 (Fig. 1) and tooth‐cusp morphology. 9 There are obvious adaptive, natural‐selection based explanations for these patterns. The hands and feet are in direct contact with a substrate, so their form would be expected to reflect substrate preference, whereas tooth shape is related directly to the functional demands of masticating foods having different mechanical properties. What remains unclear, however, is the role of developmental and genetic processes that underlie the evolutionary diversity of the primate body plan. Are variational tendencies a signature of constraints in developmental pathways? What is the genetic basis for similar morphological transformations among closely related species? These are a sampling of the types of questions we believe can be addressed by future research integrating evidence from paleontology, comparative morphology, and developmental genetics.     

Mosaic evolution,preadaptation, and the evolution of evolvability in apes

A major goal in postsynthesis evolutionary biology has been to better understand how complex interactions between traits drive movement along and facilitate the formation of distinct evolutionary pathways. I present analyses of a character matrix sampled across the haplorrhine skeleton that revealed several modules of characters displaying distinct patterns in macroevolutionary disparity. Comparison of these patterns to those in neurological development showed that early ape evolution was characterized by an intense regime of evolutionary and developmental flexibility. Shifting and reduced constraint in apes was met with episodic bursts in phenotypic innovation that built a wide array of functional diversity over a foundation of shared developmental and anatomical structure. Shifts in modularity drove dramatic evolutionary changes across the ape body plan in two distinct ways: (1) an episode of relaxed integration early in hominoid evolution coincided with bursts in evolutionary rate across multiple character suites; (2) the formation of two new trait modules along the branch leading to chimps and humans preceded rapid and dramatic evolutionary shifts in the carpus and pelvis. Changes to the structure of evolutionary mosaicism may correspond to enhanced evolvability that has a “preadaptive” effect by catalyzing later episodes of dramatic morphological remodeling.     

Developmental Integration and the Evolution of Pleiotropy

The different forms of morphological integration, developmental,functional, genetic, and evolutionary are defined and theirtheoretical relationships explored. Quantitative genetic modelspredict that the co-selection of traits involved in a commonfunction will lead to pleiotropic effects at the loci affectingthem while functionally-unrelated traits will be affected byseparate sets of loci (Wagner, 1996). The patterns of geneticvariation produced by these pleiotropic mutations and stabilizingselection for functionally and developmentally interacting traitsresults in their specific co-inheritance relative to other traits.This in turn leads to their co-ordinated response to selection.Therefore, functional and developmental integration lead togenetic integration which, in turn leads to evolutionary integration.Three examples of how developmental integration structures pleiotropyand morphological variation in non-human primate crania, artificially-modifiedhuman crania, and for the effects ofindividual genes on murinemandibular morphology are presented.     

Typology now: homology and developmental constraints explain evolvability

By linking the concepts of homology and morphological organization to evolvability, this paper attempts to (1) bridge the gap between developmental and phylogenetic approaches to homology and to (2) show that developmental constraints and natural selection are compatible and in fact complementary. I conceive of a homologue as a unit of morphological evolvability, i.e., as a part of an organism that can exhibit heritable phenotypic variation independently of the organism’s other homologues. An account of homology therefore consists in explaining how an organism’s developmental constitution results in different homologues/characters as units that can evolve independently of each other. The explanans of an account of homology is developmental, yet the very explanandum is an evolutionary phenomenon: evolvability in a character-by-character fashion, which manifests itself in phylogenetic patterns as recognized by phylogenetic approaches to homology. While developmental constraints and selection have often been viewed as antagonistic forces, I argue that both are complementary as they concern different parts of the evolutionary process. Developmental constraints, conceived of as the presence of the same set of homologues across phenotypic change, pertain to how heritable variation can be generated in the first place (evolvability), while natural selection operates subsequently on the produced variation.

Arabidopsis thaliana leaf form evolved via loss of KNOX expression in leaves in association with a selective sweep

Morphological diversity is often caused by altered gene expression of key developmental regulators. However, the precise developmental trajectories through which morphologies evolved remain poorly understood. It is also unclear to what degree genetic changes contributing to morphological divergence were fixed by natural selection. Here we investigate these problems in the context of evolutionary developmental transitions that produced the simple unlobed leaf of the model species Arabidopsis thaliana. We demonstrate that A. thaliana leaf shape likely derived from a more complex lobed ancestral state that persists in extant Arabidopsis species. We also show that evolution of the unlobed leaf form in A. thaliana involved loss of expression of the knotted1-like homeobox gene SHOOTMERISTEMLESS (STM) in leaves and that cis-regulatory divergence contributed to this process. Further, we provide evidence for a selective sweep at the A. thaliana STM locus, indicating that loss of STM expression in A. thaliana leaves may have been fixed by positive selection. In summary, our data provide key information as to when and how the characteristic leaf form of A. thaliana evolved.     

Differing evolutionary patterns underlie convergence on elongate morphology in endemic fishes of Lake Waccamaw, North Carolina

An extensive body of research has recently demonstrated patterns of parallel and/or convergent evolution that arise from divergent natural selection pressures exerted across environmental gradients. These studies, although providing some of our best empirical evidence for natural selection, have focused on rather narrow phylogenetic scopes, more often than not comparing patterns of morphological change among closely‐related taxa within a single genus. Organisms in replicated populations in these studies are often assumed to have accomplished convergence via similar underlying processes. However, such assumptions cannot be made when looking at evolution across broader phylogenetic and ecological spectra. In the present study, we assessed morphological change across a much broader scale to test whether similar evolutionary and developmental patterns underlie convergence. Specifically, we studied morphological change that has occurred in a novel lake environment (Lake Waccamaw, North Carolina, USA) where three phylogenetically‐disparate fishes representing different orders have speciated and independently evolved streamlined morphologies relative to their deeper‐bodied progenitors occupying nearby streams and coastal regions. Geometric morphometric analyses revealed that, although the bulk of shape change between environments is similar across taxa, significant species‐specific responses, concordant with differing expectations based on the ecologies of these taxa, were also found. Moreover, allometry analyses indicated that the developmental patterns underlying this change also differ across taxa. The present study provides evidence that, within a common environment, convergence can be achieved by different evolutionary and developmental patterns in phylogenetically‐ and ecologically‐disparate taxa. Finally, these results contradict the commonly‐held hypothesis that fishes should be more streamlined in streams than lakes and emphasize the need to also consider other environmental characteristics, such as water clarity and physical complexity, in studies of divergence. © 2009 The Linnean Society of London, Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2009, 98 , 636–645.     

Natural selection affects multiple aspects of genetic variation at putatively neutral sites across the human genome

A major question in evolutionary biology is how natural selection has shaped patterns of genetic variation across the human genome. Previous work has documented a reduction in genetic diversity in regions of the genome with low recombination rates. However, it is unclear whether other summaries of genetic variation, like allele frequencies, are also correlated with recombination rate and whether these correlations can be explained solely by negative selection against deleterious mutations or whether positive selection acting on favorable alleles is also required. Here we attempt to address these questions by analyzing three different genome-wide resequencing datasets from European individuals. We document several significant correlations between different genomic features. In particular, we find that average minor allele frequency and diversity are reduced in regions of low recombination and that human diversity, human-chimp divergence, and average minor allele frequency are reduced near genes. Population genetic simulations show that either positive natural selection acting on favorable mutations or negative natural selection acting against deleterious mutations can explain these correlations. However, models with strong positive selection on nonsynonymous mutations and little negative selection predict a stronger negative correlation between neutral diversity and nonsynonymous divergence than observed in the actual data, supporting the importance of negative, rather than positive, selection throughout the genome. Further, we show that the widespread presence of weakly deleterious alleles, rather than a small number of strongly positively selected mutations, is responsible for the correlation between neutral genetic diversity and recombination rate. This work suggests that natural selection has affected multiple aspects of linked neutral variation throughout the human genome and that positive selection is not required to explain these observations.     

How to Explore Morphological Integration in Human Evolution and Development?

Most studies in evolutionary developmental biology focus on large-scale evolutionary processes using experimental or molecular approaches, whereas evolutionary quantitative genetics provides mathematical models of the influence of heritable phenotypic variation on the short-term response to natural selection. Studies of morphological integration typically are situated in-between these two styles of explanation. They are based on the consilience of observed phenotypic covariances with qualitative developmental, functional, or evolutionary models. Here we review different forms of integration along with multiple other sources of phenotypic covariances, such as geometric and spatial dependencies among measurements. We discuss one multivariate method [partial least squares analysis (PLS)] to model phenotypic covariances and demonstrate how it can be applied to study developmental integration using two empirical examples. In the first example we use PLS to study integration between the cranial base and the face in human postnatal development. Because the data are longitudinal, we can model both cross-sectional integration and integration of growth itself, i.e., how cross-sectional variance and covariance is actually generated in the course of ontogeny. We find one factor of developmental integration (connecting facial size and the length of the anterior cranial base) that is highly canalized during postnatal development, leading to decreasing cross-sectional variance and covariance. A second factor (overall cranial length to height ratio) is less canalized and leads to increasing (co)variance. In a second example, we examine the evolutionary significance of these patterns by comparing cranial integration in humans to that in chimpanzees.     

From unicellularity to multicellularity - molecular speculations about early animal evolution

A morphological, physiological, developmental, and genetic organization of great complexity ineluctably unfolded from relatively simple phenomena invested with enormous potential. Sometime long ago in the Protererozoic times, parasitic invasions caused lower evolutionary levels to integrate into higher-level selection. Therefore, we have a multi-level selection problem that ultimately revolves around the question of how natural selection among lower-level units acts to create higher-level units of selection, in which Darwinian competition among replicators ceases to be the foremost force. The first level relinquishes its independence for the benefit of a higher-level cooperative force that is now the criterion of fitness for the new transition in the evolutionary process.     

Ontogenetic convergence and evolution of foot morphology in European cave salamanders (Family: Plethodontidae)

Background  

A major goal in evolutionary biology is to understand the evolution of phenotypic diversity. Both natural and sexual selection play a large role in generating phenotypic adaptations, with biomechanical requirements and developmental mechanisms mediating patterns of phenotypic evolution. For many traits, the relative importance of selective and developmental components remains understudied.     

Cranial evolution in sakis (Pithecia, Platyrrhini). II: Evolutionary processes and morphological integration

Patterns of interspecific differentiation in saki monkeys (Pithecia) are quantitatively described and possible evolutionary processes producing them are examined. The comparison of species correlation matrices to expected patterns of morphological integration reveal significant and similar patterns of development-based cranial integration among species. Aspects of the facial region are more heavily influenced by general size variation than features of the neural region. The comparison of pooled within- and between-groups V/CV matrices suggests that genetic drift might be a sufficient explanation for saki cranial evolution. Differential natural selection gradients are also reconstructed because selection may also have caused population differentiation through evolutionary time. These gradients illustrate the inherent multivariate nature of selection, being a consequence of the interaction between existing morphological integration (correlation) among traits and the action of natural selection. Yet, our attempt to interpret selection gradients in terms of their functional significance did not result in any clear association between selection and function. Perhaps this is also an indication that morphological evolution in sakis was mostly neutral.     

Evo-devo and accounting for Darwin's endless forms

Evo-devo has led to dramatic advances in our understanding of how the processes of development can contribute to explaining patterns of evolutionary diversification that underlie the endless forms of animal life on the Earth. This is increasingly the case not only for the origins of evolutionary novelties that permit new functions and open up new adaptive zones, but also for the processes of evolutionary tinkering that occur within the subsequent radiations of related species. Evo-devo has time and again yielded spectacular examples of Darwin''s notions of common ancestry and of descent with modification. It has also shown that the evolution of endless forms is more about the evolution of the regulatory machinery of ancient genes than the origin and elaboration of new genes. Evolvability, especially with respect to the capacity of a developmental system to evolve and to generate the variation in form for natural selection to screen, has become a pivotal focus of evo-devo. As a consequence, a balancing of the concept of endless forms in morphospace with a greater awareness of the potential for developmental constraints and bias is becoming more general. The prospect of parallel horizons opening up for the evolution of behaviour is exciting; in particular, does Sean Carroll''s phrase referring to old genes learning new tricks in the evolution of endless forms apply equally as well to patterns of diversity and disparity in behavioural trait-space?     

A MODEL FOR DEVELOPMENT AND EVOLUTION OF COMPLEX MORPHOLOGICAL STRUCTURES

How 'complex' or composite morphological structures like the mammalian craniomandibular region arise during development and how they are altered during evolution are two major unresolved questions in biology. Herein, we have described a model for the development and evolution of complex morphological structures. The model assumes that natural selection acts upon an array of phenotypes generated by variation in a variety of underlying genetic and epigenetic controlling factors. Selection refines the integration of the various morphogenetic components during ontogeny in order to produce a functioning structure and to adapt the organisms to differing patterns of environmental heterogeneity. The model was applied to the development and evolution of the mammalian mandible (which is used as a paradigm of complex morphological structures). The embryology of the mandible was examined in detail in order to identify the fundamental developmental units which are necessary to assemble the final morphological structure. The model is quite general since equivalent units exist for the development of many other biological structures. This model could be applied to many other developing morphological structures as well as other groups of organisms. For example, it can be applied to cell parameters during Drosophila development (Atchley, 1987). The model as discussed in this paper assumes that morphological changes in the mandible result from evolutionary changes in its underlying developmental units. The developmental units relate to characteristics of cellular condensations which are produced from the differentiation of embryonic neural crest cells. The developmental units include: the number of stem cells in preskeletal condensations (n), the time of initiation of condensation formation (t), the fraction of cells that is mitotically active within a condensation (f), the rate of division of these cells (r), and their rate of cell death (d). These units and their derivative structures are discussed in terms of types of tissue differentiation (chondrogenesis, osteogenesis, primary/secondary osteogenesis, intramembranous/endochondral ossification) and growth properties of major morphological regions of the mandible. Variation in these five units provides the developmental basis for ontogenetic and phylogenetic modification of mandibular morphology. We have discussed how these developmental units are influenced by (a) the cell lineage from which they arise, (b) epithelial-mesenchymal (inductive tissue) interactions, (c) regulation of cell differentiation, and (d) extrinsic factors such as muscles, teeth and hormones. Evidence was provided that variation in mandibular morphology is heritable, subject to modification by natural selection, and that divergence among different genetic stocks has apparently occurred through changes in these developmental units and their derivative structures.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)