Functional evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo) of morphological novelties in plants

The origin of morphological and ecological novelties is a long-standing problem in evolutionary biology.Understanding these processes requires investigation from both the development and evolution standpoints,which promotes a new research field called evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo).The fundamental mechanism for the origin of a novel structure may involve heterotopy,heterochrony,ectopic expression,or loss of an existing regulatory factor.Accordingly,the morphological and ecological traits cont...     

Fungal evo-devo: organelles and multicellular complexity

Peroxisome-derived Woronin bodies of the Ascomycota phyla, and the endoplasmic reticulum (ER)-derived septal pore cap (SPC) of the Basidiomycota, are both fungal organelles that prevent cytoplasmic bleeding when multicellular hyphal filaments are wounded. Analysis of Woronin body constituent proteins suggests that these organelles evolved in part through gene duplication and co-opting of non-essential genes for new functions, indicating that new organelles can arise through typical evolutionary mechanisms. Interestingly, clades possessing the Woronin body and SPC also produce the largest and most complex multicellular fungal reproductive structures. Certain Woronin body and SPC mutants have defects in growth and development, suggesting functions beyond cellular wound healing. I argue that studying these specialized systems will help to reveal the basis for fungal diversity and provide general principles for co-evolution of organelles and multicellular complexity.     

The ocular skeleton through the eye of evo-devo

An evolutionary developmental (evo-devo) approach to understanding the evolution, homology, and development of structures has proved important for unraveling complex integrated skeletal systems through the use of modules, or modularity. An ocular skeleton, which consists of cartilage and sometimes bone, is present in many vertebrates; however, the origin of these two components remains elusive. Using both paleontological and developmental data, I propose that the vertebrate ocular skeleton is neural crest derived and that a single cranial neural crest module divided early in vertebrate evolution, possibly during the Ordovician, to give rise to an endoskeletal component and an exoskeletal component within the eye. These two components subsequently became uncoupled with respect to timing, placement within the sclera and inductive epithelia, enabling them to evolve independently and to diversify. In some extant groups, these two modules have become reassociated with one another. Furthermore, the data suggest that the endoskeletal component of the ocular skeleton was likely established and therefore evolved before the exoskeletal component. This study provides important insights into the evolution of the ocular skeleton, a region with a long evolutionary history among vertebrates.     

Auxology: when auxin meets plant evo-devo

Auxin is implicated throughout plant growth and development. Although the effects of this plant hormone have been recognized for more than a century, it is only in the past two decades that light has been shed on the molecular mechanisms that regulate auxin homeostasis, signaling, transport, crosstalk with other hormonal pathways as well as its roles in plant development. These discoveries established a molecular framework to study the role of auxin in land plant evolution. Here, we review recent advances in auxin biology and their implications in both micro- and macro-evolution of plant morphology. By analogy to the term 'hoxology', which refers to the critical role of HOX genes in metazoan evolution, we propose to introduce the term 'auxology' to take into account the crucial role of auxin in plant evo-devo.     

Tunicates push the limits of animal evo-devo

The phylum to which humans belong, Chordata, takes its name from one of the major shared derived features of the group, the notochord. All chordates have a notochord, at least during embryogenesis, and there is little doubt about notochord homology at the morphological level. A study in BMC Evolutionary Biology now shows that there is greater variability in the molecular genetics underlying notochord development than previously appreciated.     

The choice of model organisms in evo-devo

Study of the model organisms of developmental biology was crucial in establishing evo-devo as a new discipline. However, it has been claimed that this limited sample of organisms paints a biased picture of the role of development in evolution. Consequently, judicious choice of new model organisms is necessary to provide a more balanced picture. The challenge is to determine the best criteria for choosing new model organisms, given limited resources.     

The genetics and evo-devo of butterfly wing patterns

Understanding how the spectacular diversity of colour patterns on butterfly wings is shaped by natural selection, and how particular pattern elements are generated, has been the focus of both evolutionary and developmental biologists. The growing field of evolutionary developmental biology has now begun to provide a link between genetic variation and the phenotypes that are produced by developmental processes and that are sorted by natural selection. Butterfly wing patterns are set to become one of the few examples of morphological diversity to be studied successfully at many levels of biological organization, and thus to yield a more complete picture of adaptive morphological evolution.     

Written in stone: fossils, genes and evo-devo

Fossils give evo-devo a past. They inform phylogenetic trees to show the direction of evolution of developmental features, and they can reveal ancient body plans. Fossils also provide the primary data that are used to date past events, including divergence times needed to estimate molecular clocks, which provide rates of developmental evolution. Fossils can set boundaries for hypotheses that are generated from living developmental systems, and for predictions of ancestral development and morphologies. Finally, although fossils rarely yield data on developmental processes directly, informative examples occur of extraordinary preservation of soft body parts, embryos and genomic information.     

The hypoblast (visceral endoderm): an evo-devo perspective

When amniotes appeared during evolution, embryos freed themselves from intracellular nutrition; development slowed, the mid-blastula transition was lost and maternal components became less important for polarity. Extra-embryonic tissues emerged to provide nutrition and other innovations. One such tissue, the hypoblast (visceral endoderm in mouse), acquired a role in fixing the body plan: it controls epiblast cell movements leading to primitive streak formation, generating bilateral symmetry. It also transiently induces expression of pre-neural markers in the epiblast, which also contributes to delay streak formation. After gastrulation, the hypoblast might protect prospective forebrain cells from caudalizing signals. These functions separate mesendodermal and neuroectodermal domains by protecting cells against being caught up in the movements of gastrulation.     

The origin and evolution of carpels and fruits from an evo-devo perspective

The flower is an evolutionary innovation in angiosperms that drives the evolution of biodiversity.The carpel is integral to a flower and develops into fruits after fertilization,while the perianth,consisting of the calyx and corolla,is decorative to facilitate pollination and protect the internal organs,including the carpels and stamens.Therefore,the nature of flower origin is carpel and stamen origin,which represents one of the greatest and fundamental unresolved issues in plant evolutionary bi...     

Snail shell coiling (re-)evolution and the evo-devo revolution

During the last two decades evolutionary developmental biology has become a major research programme whose findings put into question some concepts lying at the core of the 'Synthetic Theory'. However, some authors are waiting for a 'revolution' in biology, one in which the existing genetic determinism will give way to a new conceptual understanding of the complexity of living organisms. This 'revolution' should necessarily pass through the elaboration of an appropriate theoretical framework integrating the non-linear dynamics of development as its fundamental basis. This objective implies a drastic shift in the way causality is generally understood as well as a purge of numerous convenient but misleading metaphors such as genetic or developmental programmes. Although most authors do not take these metaphors too literally, some persist in employing such 'instructionist' notions in a more literal perspective, and, in doing so, deny some concepts at the core of evolutionary developmental biology. We critically review two recent studies suggesting that shell coiling has re-evolved in a family of limpets (Calyptraeidae, Gastropoda). We stress that this putative re-evolution of snail shell coiling results only from an arbitrary scoring procedure leading us to consider shell coiling as a binary discrete character. We show that the way in which these authors connect this case study to evolutionary theories stems from the unwarranted premise of a linear mapping of genes onto phenotypes where particulate inheritance of morphological characters seems implicitly assumed. We illustrate how the persisting unclear role of genes in morphogenesis allows the maintenance of the adaptationist programme.     

Kowalevsky, comparative evolutionary embryology, and the intellectual lineage of evo-devo

Alexander Kowalevsky was one of the most significant 19th century biologists working at the intersection of evolution and embryology. The reinstatement of the Alexander Kowalevsky Medal by the St. Petersburg Society of Naturalists for outstanding contributions to understanding evolutionary relationships in the animal kingdom, evolutionary developmental biology, and comparative zoology is timely now that Evo-devo has emerged as a major research discipline in contemporary biology. Consideration of the intellectual lineage of comparative evolutionary embryology explicitly forces a reconsideration of some current conceptions of the modern emergence of Evo-devo, which has tended to exist in the shadow of experimental embryology throughout the 20th century, especially with respect to the recent success of developmental biology and developmental genetics. In particular we advocate a sharper distinction between the heritage of problems and the heritage of tools for contemporary Evo-devo. We provide brief overviews of the work of N. J. Berrill and D. T. Anderson to illustrate comparative evolutionary embryology in the 20th century, which provides an appropriate contextualization for a conceptual review of our research on the sea urchin genus Heliocidaris over the past two decades. We conclude that keeping research questions rather than experimental capabilities at the forefront of Evo-devo may be an antidote to any repeat of the stagnation experienced by the first group of evolutionary developmental biologists over one hundred years ago and acknowledges Kowalevsky's legacy in evolutionary embryology.     

Unburdening evo-devo: ancestral attractions, model organisms, and basal baloney

Although flourishing, I argue that evo-devo is not yet a mature scientific discipline. Its philosophical foundation exhibits an internal inconsistency that results from a metaphysical confusion. In modern evolutionary biology, species and other taxa are most commonly considered as individuals. I accept this thesis to be the best available foundation for modern evolutionary biology. However, evo-devo is characterized by a remarkable degree of typological thinking, which instead treats taxa as classes. This metaphysical incompatibility causes much distorted thinking. In this paper, I will discuss the logical implications of accepting the individuality thesis for evo-devo. First, I will illustrate the degree to which typological thinking pervades evo-devo. This ranges from the relatively innocent use of typologically tainted language to the more serious misuse of differences between taxa as evidence against homology and monophyly, and the logically flawed concept of partial homology. Second, I will illustrate how, in a context of typological thinking, evo-devo's harmless preoccupation with distant ancestors has become transformed into a pernicious problem afflicting the choice of model organisms. I will expose the logical flaws underlying the common assumption that model organisms can be expected to represent the clades they are a part of in an unambiguous way. I will expose the logical flaws underlying the general assumption that basal taxa are the best available stand-ins for ancestors and that they best represent the clade of which they are a part, while also allowing for optimal extrapolation of results.