The origin,patterning and evolution of insect appendages

The appendages of the adult fruit fly and other insects and Arthropods develop from secondary embryonic fields that form after the primary anterior/posterior and dorsal/ventral axes of the embryo have been determined. In Drosophila, the position and fate of the different fields formed within each segment are determined by genes acting along both embryonic axes, within individual segments, and within specific fields. Since the major architectural differences between most Arthropod classes and orders involve variations in the number, type and morphology of body appendages, the elucidation of the embryology and molecular genetics of the origin and patterning of insect limb fields may help to facilitate an understanding of both the mechanism of appendage formation and some of the major steps in the morphological evolution of the Arthropods. In this review, we will discuss recent studies that have advanced our understanding of both the origin and patterning of Drosophila leg and wing secondary fields. These results provide fresh insights into potentially general mechanisms of how body parts develop and evolve.     

The appendage role of insect disco genes and possible implications on the evolution of the maggot larval form

Though initially identified as necessary for neural migration, Disconnected and its partially redundant paralog, Disco-related, are required for proper head segment identity during Drosophila embryogenesis. Here, we present evidence that these genes are also required for proper ventral appendage development during development of the adult fly, where they specify medial to distal appendage development. Cells lacking the disco genes cannot contribute to the medial and distal portions of ventral appendages. Further, ectopic disco transforms dorsal appendages toward ventral fates; in wing discs, the medial and distal leg development pathways are activated. Interestingly, this appendage role is conserved in the red flour beetle, Tribolium (where legs develop during embryogenesis), yet in the beetle we found no evidence for a head segmentation role. The lack of an embryonic head specification role in Tribolium could be interpreted as a loss of the head segmentation function in Tribolium or gain of this function during evolution of flies. However, we suggest an alternative explanation. We propose that the disco genes always function as appendage factors, but their appendage nature is masked during Drosophila embryogenesis due to the reduction of limb fields in the maggot style Drosophila larva.     

Patterning mechanisms in the body trunk and the appendages of Drosophila.

During evolution, many animal groups have developed specialised outgrowths of the body wall, limbs or appendages. The type of appendage depends on the identity of the segment where they appear, indicating that the Hox genes contribute to appendage specification. Moreover, work carried out principally in Drosophila has identified the gene products and the mechanisms involved in pattern formation in the appendages. In this essay, we compare the morphogenetic processes in the appendages and the body wall; the function of the Hox genes and the response to the signalling molecules involved in local patterning. We speculate that, although the basic mechanisms are similar, there are significant differences in the manner the body trunk and appendages respond to them.     

A conserved genetic mechanism specifies deutocerebral appendage identity in insects and arachnids

The segmental architecture of the arthropod head is one of the most controversial topics in the evolutionary developmental biology of arthropods. The deutocerebral (second) segment of the head is putatively homologous across Arthropoda, as inferred from the segmental distribution of the tripartite brain and the absence of Hox gene expression of this anterior-most, appendage-bearing segment. While this homology statement implies a putative common mechanism for differentiation of deutocerebral appendages across arthropods, experimental data for deutocerebral appendage fate specification are limited to winged insects. Mandibulates (hexapods, crustaceans and myriapods) bear a characteristic pair of antennae on the deutocerebral segment, whereas chelicerates (e.g. spiders, scorpions, harvestmen) bear the eponymous chelicerae. In such hexapods as the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, and the cricket, Gryllus bimaculatus, cephalic appendages are differentiated from the thoracic appendages (legs) by the activity of the appendage patterning gene homothorax (hth). Here we show that embryonic RNA interference against hth in the harvestman Phalangium opilio results in homeonotic chelicera-to-leg transformations, and also in some cases pedipalp-to-leg transformations. In more strongly affected embryos, adjacent appendages undergo fusion and/or truncation, and legs display proximal defects, suggesting conservation of additional functions of hth in patterning the antero-posterior and proximo-distal appendage axes. Expression signal of anterior Hox genes labial, proboscipedia and Deformed is diminished, but not absent, in hth RNAi embryos, consistent with results previously obtained with the insect G. bimaculatus. Our results substantiate a deep homology across arthropods of the mechanism whereby cephalic appendages are differentiated from locomotory appendages.     

Patterning of the branched head appendages in Schistocerca americana and Tribolium castaneum

Much of our understanding of arthropod limb development comes from studies on the leg imaginal disc of Drosophila melanogaster. The fly limb is a relatively simple unbranched (uniramous) structure extending out from the body wall. The molecular basis for this outgrowth involves the overlap of two signaling molecules, Decapentaplegic (Dpp) and Wingless (Wg), to create a single domain of distal outgrowth, clearly depicted by the expression of the Distal-less gene (Dll). The expression of wg and dpp during the development of other arthropod thoracic limbs indicates that these pathways might be conserved across arthropods for uniramous limb development. The appendages of crustaceans and the gnathal appendages of insects, however, exhibit a diverse array of morphologies, ranging from those with no distal elements, such as the mandible, to appendages with multiple distal elements. Examples of the latter group include branched appendages or those that possess multiple lobes; such complex morphologies are seen for many crustacean limbs as well as the maxillary and labial appendages of many insects. It is unclear how, if at all, the known patterning genes for making a uniramous limb might be deployed to generate these diverse appendage forms. Experiments in Drosophila have shown that by forcing ectopic overlaps of Wg and Dpp signaling it is possible to generate artificially branched legs. To test whether naturally branched appendages form in a similar manner, we detailed the expression patterns of wg, dpp, and Dll in the development of the branched gnathal appendages of the grasshopper, Schistocerca americana, and the flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum. We find that the branches of the gnathal appendages are not specified through the redeployment of the Wg-Dpp system for distal outgrowth, but our comparative studies do suggest a role for Dpp in forming furrows between tissues.     

Temporal comparison of Broad-Complex expression during eggshell-appendage patterning and morphogenesis in two Drosophila species with different eggshell-appendage numbers

A central question in biology is how developmental mechanisms are altered to bring about morphological evolution. Drosophilids boast a remarkable diversity in eggshell-appendage number-from as few as one to as many as nine, depending on the species. Appendage patterning in Drosophila melanogaster is well characterized, inviting candidate-gene-based approaches that identify the developmental mechanisms underlying Drosophilid eggshell diversity. Previous studies show that a combination of Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and TGFbeta/BMP2,4 Decapentaplegic (DPP) signaling determines appendage fate in D. melanogaster. Broad-Complex expression integrates EGFR and DPP signaling and predicts future appendage position. Here we present our confocal analyses of BR-C immunofluorescence and appendage morphogenesis in Drosophila melanogaster (two appendages) and Drosophila virilis (four appendages). Our comparison suggests that differences in BR-C patterns among Drosophilids may be strongly influenced by anterior-posterior information.     

Functional analyses in the milkweed bug Oncopeltus fasciatus (Hemiptera) support a role for Wnt signaling in body segmentation but not appendage development

Specification of the proximal-distal (PD) axis of insect appendages is best understood in Drosophila melanogaster, where conserved signaling molecules encoded by the genes decapentaplegic (dpp) and wingless (wg) play key roles. However, the development of appendages from imaginal discs as in Drosophila is a derived state, while more basal insects produce appendages from embryonic limb buds. Therefore, the universality of the Drosophila limb PD axis specification mechanism has been debated since dpp expression in more basal insect species differs dramatically from Drosophila. Here, we test the function of Wnt signaling in the development of the milkweed bug Oncopeltus fasciatus, a species with the basal state of appendage development from limb buds. RNA interference of wg and pangolin (pan) produce defects in the germband and eyes, but not in the appendages. Distal-less and dachshund, two genes regulated by Wg signaling in Drosophila and expressed in specific PD domains along the limbs of both species, are expressed normally in the limbs of pan-depleted Oncopeltus embryos. Despite these apparently paradoxical results, Armadillo protein, the transducer of Wnt signaling, does not accumulate properly in the nuclei of cells in the legs of pan-depleted embryos. In contrast, engrailed RNAi in Oncopeltus produces cuticular and appendage defects similar to Drosophila. Therefore, our data suggest that Wg signaling is functionally conserved in the development of the germband, while it is not essential in the specification of the limb PD axis in Oncopeltus and perhaps basal insects.     

The Hox gene Abdominal-B antagonizes appendage development in the genital disc of Drosophila

In Drosophila, the Hox gene Abdominal-B is required to specify the posterior abdomen and the genitalia. Homologues of Abdominal-B in other species are also needed to determine the posterior part of the body. We have studied the function of Abdominal-B in the formation of Drosophila genitalia, and show here that absence of Abdominal-B in the genital disc of Drosophila transforms male and female genitalia into leg or, less frequently, into antenna. These transformations are accompanied by the ectopic expression of genes such as Distal-less or dachshund, which are normally required in these appendages. The extent of wild-type and ectopic Distal-less expression depends on the antagonistic activities of the Abdominal-B gene, as a repressor, and of the decapentaplegic and wingless genes as activators. Absence of Abdominal-B also changes the expression of Homothorax, a Hox gene co-factor. Our results suggest that Abdominal-B forms genitalia by modifying an underlying positional information and repressing appendage development. We propose that the genital primordia should be subdivided into two regions, one of them competent to be transformed into an appendage in the absence of Abdominal-B.     

Comparative analysis of leg and antenna development in wild-type and homeotic<Emphasis Type="Italic"> Drosophila melanogaster</Emphasis>

The insect leg and antenna are thought to be homologous structures, evolved from a common ancestral appendage. The homeotic transformations of antenna to leg in Drosophila produced by mutation of the Hox gene Antennapedia are position-specific, such that every particular antenna structure is transformed into a specific leg counterpart. This has been taken to suggest that the developmental programmes of these two appendages are still similar. In particular, the mechanisms for the specification of a cell's position within the appendage would be identical, only their interpretation would be different and subject to homeotic gene control. Here we explore the degree of conservation between the developmental programmes of leg and antenna in Drosophila and other dipterans, in wild-type and homeotic conditions. Most of the appendage pattern-forming genes are active in both appendages, and their expression domains are partially conserved. However, the regulatory relationships and interactions between these genes are different, and in fact cells change their expression while undergoing homeotic transformation. Thus, the positional information, and the mechanisms which generate it, are not strictly conserved between leg and antenna; and homeotic genes alter the establishment of positional clues, not only their interpretation. The partial conservation of pattern-forming genes in both appendages ensures a predictable re-specification of positional clues, producing the observed positional specificity of homeotic transformations.     

Clostridium Spores with Ribbon-like Appendages

Spores of Clostridium sp. N1 are characterized by numerous broad ribbon-like appendages attached to one end. The appendages are two to three times the length of the spore and, at their maximal dimension, may be two-thirds the width of the spore. They are attached to the spore body by a common trunk which is continuous with the outer spore coat. Each appendage is a multilayered structure and is enclosed in an amorphous material. Details of spore and appendage formation are described, and appendage ultrastructural features are presented. The function of the appendages is not known.     

Of flies and men; p53, a tumour suppressor

The completion of the Drosophila genome sequencing project [Science 287 (2000) 2185] has reconfirmed the fruit fly as a model organism to study human disease. Comparison studies have shown that two thirds of genes implicated in human cancers have counterparts in the fly [Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 11 (2001) 274; J. Cell Biol. 150 (2000) F23], including the tumour suppressor, p53. The suitability of the fruit fly to study the function of the tumour suppressor p53 is further exemplified by the lack of p53 family members within the fly genome, i.e., no homologues to p63 and p73 have been identified. Hence, there is no redundancy between family members greatly facilitating the analysis of p53 function. In addition, studying p53 in Drosophila provides an opportunity to learn about the evolution of tumour suppressors. Here, we will discuss what is known about Drosophila p53 in relation to human p53.     

From development to biodiversity—Tribolium castaneum, an insect model organism for short germband development

Insect embryogenesis is best understood in the fruit fly Drosophila. However, Drosophila embryogenesis shows evolutionary-derived features: anterior patterning is controlled by a highly derived Hox gene bicoid, the body segments form almost simultaneously and appendages develop from imaginal discs. In contrast, embryogenesis of the red flour beetle Tribolium castaneum displays typical features in anterior patterning, axis and limb formation shared with most insects, other arthropods as well as with vertebrates. Anterior patterning depends on the conserved homeobox gene orthodenticle, the main body axis elongates sequentially and limbs grow continuously starting from an appendage bud. Thus, by analysing developmental processes in the beetle at the molecular and cellular level, inferences can be made for similar processes in other arthropods. With the completion of sequencing the Tribolium genome, the door is now open for post-genomic studies such as RNA expression profiling, proteomics and functional genomics to identify beetle-specific gene circuits.     

Species-specific activation of EGF receptor signaling underlies evolutionary diversity in the dorsal appendage number of the genus Drosophila eggshells

In Drosophila melanogaster, the patterning of dorsal appendages on the eggshell is strictly controlled by EGFR signaling. However, the number of dorsal appendages is remarkably diverse among Drosophila species. For example, D. melanogaster and D. virilis have two and four dorsal appendages, respectively. Here we show that during oogenesis the expression patterns of rhomboid (rho) and argos (aos), positive and negative regulators of EGFR signaling, respectively, were substantially different between D. melanogaster and D. virilis. Importantly, the number and position of both the rho expression and MAPK activation were consistent with those of the dorsal appendages in each species. Despite the differences in the spatial expression, these results suggest that the function of EGFR signaling in dorsal appendage formation is largely conserved between these two species. Thus, our results link the species-specific activation of EGFR signaling and the evolution of eggshell morphology in Drosophila.     

The origin and evolution of appendages

Current awareness of gene expression patterns and developmental mechanisms involved in the outgrowth and patterning of animal appendages contributes to our understanding of the origin and evolution of these body parts. Nevertheless, this vision needs to be complemented by a new adequate comparative framework, in the context of a factorial notion of homology. It may even be profitable to categorize as appendages also gut diverticula, body ingrowths and 'virtual appendages' such as the eye spots on butterfly wings. Another unwarranted framework is the Cartesian co-ordinate system onto which the appendages are currently described and where it is supposed that one patterning system exists for each separate Cartesian axis. It may be justified, instead, to look for correspondences between the appendages and the main body axis of the same animal, as the latter might be the source of the growth and patterning mechanisms which gave rise to the former. This hypothesis of axis paramorphisms is contrasted with the current hypothesis of gene co-option. Recapitulationism is a common fault in current Evo-Devo perspectives concerning the origin of the appendages, in that the evolutionary origin of appendages is often expected to be the same as one of the key mechanisms involved in the ontogenetic inception of appendage formation. This unwarranted perspective is also evident in the current debate on the nature of the default arthropod appendage. Most likely, a default arthropod appendage never did exist, as the first appendages probably developed along the trunk of an animal already patterned extensively along the antero-posterior body axis.     

Fruit structure of the southern African species of Apodytes Meyer ex Arn. (Icacinaceae)

Fruit development and structure of three southern African species of Apodytes were examined by light and scanning electron microscopy. These are A. dimidiata E. Meyer ex Arn. subsp. dimidiata and two undescribed species designated Apodytes sp. nov. A and B. Fruits are unilaterally developed drupes, ellipsoid and somewhat compressed laterally, with a large succulent appendage. Appendages of A. dimidiata and Apodytes sp. nov. A are predominantly red, whereas those of Apodytes sp. nov. B are a pale translucent green. In all three species the appendages turn black in old fruit. The exocarp is uniseriate and develops solely from the outer epidermis of the ovary wall. The mesocarp is partly parenchymatous, with vascular bundles and cells containing druse crystals of calcium oxalate, and partly lignified (= stone). The uniseriate endocarp s. sir. develops from the inner epidermis of the ovary wall. In a sense the fruit of Apodytes is a composite of parts comparable to a nut (alternatively an achene) and a fleshy drupe. The drupaceous part (fleshy appendage) is a derived structure which develops from the sterile carpel of a reduced locule. We suggest that the fleshy appendage originates as an indicator of seed/fruit maturity, and to attract avian dispersers. Limited field observations support the idea that the red/black appendages of A. dimidiata and Apodytes sp. nov. A also serve as an edible reward for birds. Dispersal of fruit of Apodytes sp. nov. B, with its rather inconspicuously coloured appendage, may be dependent on a specialized fruit/frugivore relationship.     

Inclusion appendages associated with the intraerythrocytic rickettsial parasiteAnaplasma marginale are composed of bundled actin filaments

Summary Anaplasma marginale, a tick-borne rickettsia that infects erythrocytes of cattle, occurs within a parasitophorous vacuole or inclusion body. A tail-like inclusion appendage, composed of multiple filaments, occurs in association with the inclusion body membrane. The composition and function of the inclusion appendage have not been determined. In this study, theA. marginale inclusion appendage in bovine erythrocytes was found to be composed of actin filaments as determined by labeling with rhodamine-conjugated phalloidin. Electron microscopy studies revealed that theA. marginale inclusion appendages differed from F-actin tails reported previously in association with other pathogens in eukaryotic cells because these highly ordered structures were organized into regularly occurring striations, and the appendages were adhered directly to the parasitophorous vacuole membrane. In addition, actin appendages have not been described previously in erythrocytes. The potential role of the inclusion appendage associated withA. marginale in bovine erythrocytes and recently fed ticks is discussed.     

Insect appendages and comparative ontogenetics

It is arguable that the evolutionary and ecological success of insects is due in large part to the versatility of their articulated appendages. Recent advances in our understanding of appendage development in Drosophila melanogaster, as well as functional and expression studies in other insect species have begun to frame the general themes of appendage development in the insects. Here, we review current studies that provide for a comparison of limb developmental mechanisms acting at five levels: (1) the specification of ventral appendage primordia; (2) specification of the limb axes; (3) regulation and interactions of genes expressed in specific domains of the proximal-distal axis, such as Distal-less; (4) the specification of appendage identity; and (5) genetic regulation of appendage allometry.     

Drosophila peripodial cells,more than meets the eye?

Drosophila imaginal discs (appendage primordia) have proved invaluable for deciphering cellular and molecular mechanisms of animal development. By combining the accessibility of the discs with the genetic tractability of the fruit fly, researchers have discovered key mechanisms of growth control, pattern formation and long-range signaling. One of the principal experimental attractions of discs is their anatomical simplicity - they have long been considered to be cellular monolayers. During larval stages, however, the growing discs are 2-sided sacs composed of a columnar epithelium on one side and a squamous 'peripodial' epithelium on the other. Recent studies suggest important roles for peripodial epithelia in processes previously assumed to be confined to columnar cell monolayers.     

Expression patterns of leg genes in the mouthparts of the spider<Emphasis Type="Italic"> Cupiennius salei</Emphasis> (Chelicerata: Arachnida)

The leg genes extradenticle, homothorax, dachshund, and Distal-less define three antagonistic developmental domains in the legs, but not in the antenna, of Drosophila. Here we report the expression patterns of these leg genes in the prosomal appendages of the spider Cupiennius salei. The prosoma of the spider bears six pairs of appendages: a pair of cheliceres, a pair of pedipalps, and four pairs of walking legs. Three types of appendages thus can be distinguished in the spider. We show here that in the pedipalp, the leg-like second prosomal appendage, the patterns are very similar to those in the legs themselves, indicating the presence of three antagonistic developmental domains in both appendage types. In contrast, in the chelicera, the fang-like first prosomal appendage, the patterns are different and there is no evidence for antagonistic domains. Together with data from Drosophila this suggests that leg-shaped morphology of arthropod appendages requires an underlying set of antagonistic developmental domains, whereas other morphologies (e.g. antenna, chelicera) may result from the loss of such antagonistic domains.Edited by M. Akam