WNTers in La Jolla

A 'traditional' Wnt meeting, the first of which occurred over two decades ago as a meeting of the laboratories of Harold Varmus and Roel Nusse, was held at the University of California, San Diego, in June 2007. Organized by Karl Willert, Anthony Wynshaw-Boris and Katherine Jones, the meeting was attended by nearly 400 scientists interested in ;all things Wnt', including Wnt signal transduction mechanisms, and Wnt signaling in evolutionary and developmental biology, stem cell biology, regeneration and disease. Themes that dominated the meeting included the need for precise control over each step of the signal transduction mechanism and developing therapeutics for diseases caused by altered Wnt-signaling.     

Boechera Summit 2011

Ecological model systems provide a conduit to understand the ecological impact of information gained from laboratory model species. Here, I review a 2011 meeting which focused on the systematic, ecological, evolutionary and developmental biology of the ecological model genus Boechera.     

The morphogenesis of evolutionary developmental biology

The early studies of evolutionary developmental biology (Evo-Devo) come from several sources. Tributaries flowing into Evo-Devo came from such disciplines as embryology, developmental genetics, evolutionary biology, ecology, paleontology, systematics, medical embryology and mathematical modeling. This essay will trace one of the major pathways, that from evolutionary embryology to Evo-Devo and it will show the interactions of this pathway with two other sources of Evo-Devo: ecological developmental biology and medical developmental biology. Together, these three fields are forming a more inclusive evolutionary developmental biology that is revitalizing and providing answers to old and important questions involving the formation of biodiversity on Earth. The phenotype of Evo-Devo is limited by internal constraints on what could be known given the methods and equipment of the time and it has been framed by external factors that include both academic and global politics.     

Evolutionary Novelty and the Evo-Devo Synthesis: Field Notes

Accounting for the evolutionary origins of morphological novelty is one of the core challenges of contemporary evolutionary biology. A successful explanatory framework requires the integration of different biological disciplines, but the relationships between developmental biology and standard evolutionary biology remain contested. There is also disagreement about how to define the concept of evolutionary novelty. These issues were the subjects of a workshop held in November 2009 at the University of Alberta. We report on the discussion and results of this workshop, addressing questions about (i) how to define evolutionary novelty and understand its significance, (ii) how to interpret evolutionary developmental biology as a synthesis and its relation to neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory, and (iii) how to integrate disparate biological approaches in general.     

Phylogeny and evo-devo: characters, homology, and the historical analysis of the evolution of development

The concept of homology continues to attract more and more commentary. In systematic and evolutionary biology the meaning of homology as synapomorphic similarity inherited from a common ancestor has gained wide acceptance over the last three or four decades. In recent years, however, developmental biologists, in particular, have argued for a new approach to, and new definition for, homology that revolves around the desire to make it more process-oriented and more mechanistic. These efforts raise questions about the relationship between developmental and evolutionary biology as well as how the evolution of development is to be studied. It is argued in this paper that this new approach to homology seemingly decouples developmental biology from the study of the evolution of development rather than to facilitate that study. In contrast, applying the notion of historical, phylogenetic homology to developmental data is inherently comparative and therefore evolutionary.     

Developing the genotype-to-phenotype relationship in evolutionary theory: A primer of developmental features

For decades, there have been repeated calls for more integration across evolutionary and developmental biology. However, critiques in the literature and recent funding initiatives suggest this integration remains incomplete. We suggest one way forward is to consider how we elaborate the most basic concept of development, the relationship between genotype and phenotype, in traditional models of evolutionary processes. For some questions, when more complex features of development are accounted for, predictions of evolutionary processes shift. We present a primer on concepts of development to clarify confusion in the literature and fuel new questions and approaches. The basic features of development involve expanding a base model of genotype-to-phenotype to include the genome, space, and time. A layer of complexity is added by incorporating developmental systems, including signal-response systems and networks of interactions. The developmental emergence of function, which captures developmental feedbacks and phenotypic performance, offers further model elaborations that explicitly link fitness with developmental systems. Finally, developmental features such as plasticity and developmental niche construction conceptualize the link between a developing phenotype and the external environment, allowing for a fuller inclusion of ecology in evolutionary models. Incorporating aspects of developmental complexity into evolutionary models also accommodates a more pluralistic focus on the causal importance of developmental systems, individual organisms, or agents in generating evolutionary patterns. Thus, by laying out existing concepts of development, and considering how they are used across different fields, we can gain clarity in existing debates around the extended evolutionary synthesis and pursue new directions in evolutionary developmental biology. Finally, we consider how nesting developmental features in traditional models of evolution can highlight areas of evolutionary biology that need more theoretical attention.     

Evolutionary developmental biology its roots and characteristics

The rise of evolutionary developmental biology was not the progressive isolation and characterization of developmental genes and gene networks. Many obstacles had to be overcome: the idea that all genes were more or less involved in development; the evidence that developmental processes in insects had nothing in common with those of vertebrates.Different lines of research converged toward the creation of evolutionary developmental biology, giving this field of research its present heterogeneity. This does not prevent all those working in the field from sharing the conviction that a precise characterization of evolutionary variations is required to fully understand the evolutionary process.Some evolutionary developmental biologists directly challenge the Modern Synthesis. I propose some ways to reconcile these apparently opposed visions of evolution. The turbulence seen in evolutionary developmental biology reflects the present entry of history into biology.     

植物进化发育生物学的形成与研究进展

植物进化发育生物学是最近十几年来才兴起的一门学科, 它是进化发育生物学的主要分支之一。进化发育生物学的产生经历了进化生物学与胚胎学、遗传学和发育生物学的三次大的综合, 其历史可追溯到19世纪初冯.贝尔所创立的比较胚胎学。相关研究曾沉寂了近一个世纪, 直到20世纪80年代早期, 动物中homeobox基因被发现, 90年代初花发育的 ABC模型被提出, 加之对发育相关基因研究的不断深入, 才使基因型与表型联系了起来, 进而促进了进化发育生物学的飞速发展。目前进化发育生物学已成为21世纪生命科学领域的研究热点之一。本文详细阐述了进化发育生物学产生和发展的历程, 综述了最近十几年来植物进化发育生物学的主要研究进展。文中重点介绍了与植物发育密切相关的MADS-box基因在植物各大类群中的研究现状, 讨论了植物进化发育生物学领域的研究成果对花被演化、花对称性以及叶的进化等重要问题的启示。     

植物进化发育生物学的形成与研究进展

植物进化发育生物学是最近十几年来才兴起的一门学科,它是进化发育生物学的主要分支之一。进化发育生物学的产生经历了进化生物学与胚胎学、遗传学和发育生物学的三次大的综合,其历史可追溯到19世纪初冯.贝尔所创立的比较胚胎学。相关研究曾沉寂了近一个世纪,直到20世纪80年代早期,动物中homeobox基因被发现,90年代初花发育的ABC模型被提出,加之对发育相关基因研究的不断深入,才使基因型与表型联系了起来,进而促进了进化发育生物学的飞速发展。目前进化发育生物学已成为21世纪生命科学领域的研究热点之一。本文详细阐述了进化发育生物学产生和发展的历程,综述了最近十几年来植物进化发育生物学的主要研究进展。文中重点介绍了与植物发育密切相关的MADS-box基因在植物各大类群中的研究现状,讨论了植物进化发育生物学领域的研究成果对花被演化、花对称性以及叶的进化等重要问题的启示。     

[Epigenetic theory of evolution as a basis for a new evolutionary synthesis]

There are two evolutionary theories in current biology--"modern synthesis" and "epigenetic theory". The first one is based on the assumption of hard correspondence between phenotypes and genotypes. For this reason the theory of modern synthesis is principally incompatible with developmental biology. In contrast, the epigenetic theory considers evolution as a process of environmentally controlled transformation of ontogeny. It is compatible with observed embryological regularities and used as a basis for wider evolutionary synthesis combining both Darwinian and Lamarckian mechanisms. Individual developmental system can generate only a constrained number of morphologic states. This circumstance is a nomogenetic component of the epigenetic theory: the same morphosis simultaneously appears in a number of individuals in response to environmental influence. Since the initial phenotypic change occurs to be not random, a meeting of a female and a male with the same morphosis is an event of sufficiently high probability. The nomogenetic component allows to get over the famous argument of F. Jenkin--a problem that is still difficult to explain in terms of the theory of modern synthesis.     

Michael Akam and the rise of evolutionary developmental biology

Michael Akam has been awarded the 2007 Kowalevsky medal for his many research accomplishments in the area of evolutionary developmental biology. We highlight three tributaries of Michael’s contribution to evolutionary developmental biology. First, he has made major contributions to our understanding of development of the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster. Second, he has maintained a consistent focus on several key problems in evolutionary developmental biology, including the evolving role of Hox genes in arthropods and, more recently, the evolution of segmentation mechanisms. Third, Michael has written a series of influential reviews that have integrated progress in developmental biology into an evolutionary perspective. Michael has also made a large impact on the field through his effective mentorship style, his selfless promotion of younger colleagues, and his leadership of the University Museum of Zoology at Cambridge and the European community of evolutionary developmental biologist.     

Evolution of animal body plans: the role of metazoan phylogeny at the interface between pattern and process

SUMMARY Comprehensive integrative studies are the hallmark of evolutionary developmental biology. A properly defined phylogenetic framework takes a central place in such analyses as the meeting ground for observation and inference. Molecular phylogenies take this place in many current studies on animal body plan evolution. In particular, 18S rRNA/DNA sequence analyses have yielded a new view of animal evolution that is often contrasted with a presumed traditional or classical view. First, I expose this traditional view to be a simplified historical abstraction that became textbook dogma. Second, I discuss how two recent important studies of animal body plan evolution, examining the evolution of the platyhelminth body plan and the evolutionary significance of indirect development and set-aside cells, have actively incorporated two problematic aspects of the newly emerging molecular view of animal evolution: incomplete and unresolved phylogenies.     

Development and Macroevolution: Introduction to the Symposium

Despite the historical relationship between embryology and evolutionarybiology, during most of the 20th century developmental biologyand evolutionary biology have existed as two separate subdisciplinesof biology. Recently a reunion of these subdisciplines beganto take place. This reunion involves the formulation of evolutionaryexplanations of developmental phenomena and the applicationof developmental processes as mechanisms of evolutionary change.The symposium speakers have considered both aspects of the reunionas well as some of the theoretical and methodological issuesthat are emerging from it.     

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.     

Evolutionary and developmental studies of unifacial leaves in monocots: Juncus as a model system

An important objective in evolutionary developmental biology is to understand the molecular genetic mechanisms that have given rise to morphological diversity. Leaves in angiosperms generally develop as a flattened structure with clear adaxial–abaxial polarity. In monocots, however, a unifacial leaf has evolved in a number of divergent species, in which leaf blades consist of only the abaxial identity. The mechanism of unifacial leaf development has long been a matter of debate for comparative morphologists. However, the underlying molecular genetic mechanism remains unknown. Unifacial leaves would be useful materials for developmental studies of leaf-polarity specification. Moreover, these leaves offer unique opportunities to investigate important phenomena in evolutionary biology, such as repeated evolution or convergent evolution of similar morphological traits. Here we describe the potential of unifacial leaves for evolutionary developmental studies and present our recent approaches to understanding the mechanisms of unifacial leaf development and evolution using Juncus as a model system.     

Promises and limits of an agency perspective in evolutionary developmental biology

An agent-based perspective in the study of complex systems is well established in diverse disciplines, yet is only beginning to be applied to evolutionary developmental biology. In this essay, we begin by defining agency and associated terminology formally. We then explore the assumptions and predictions of an agency perspective, apply these to select processes and key concept areas relevant to practitioners of evolutionary developmental biology, and consider the potential epistemic roles that an agency perspective might play in evo devo. Throughout, we discuss evidence supportive of agential dynamics in biological systems relevant to evo devo and explore where agency thinking may enrich the explanatory reach of research efforts in evolutionary developmental biology.     

Modern evolutional developmental biology: Mechanical and molecular genetic or phenotypic approaches?

Heightened interest in the evolutionary problems of developmental biology in the 1980s was due to the success of molecular genetics and disappointment in the synthetic theory of evolution, where the chapters of embryology and developmental biology seem to have been left out. Modern evo-devo, which turned out to be antipodean to the methodology of the synthetic theory of evolution, propagandized in the development of evolutionary problems only the mechanical and molecular genetic approach to the evolution of ontogenesis, based on cellular and intercellular interactions. The phonotypical approach to the evaluation of evolutionary occurrences in ontogenesis, which aids in the joining of the genetic and epigenetic levels of research, the theory of natural selection, the nomogenetic conception, and the problem of the wholeness of the organism in onto- and phylogenesis may be against this. The phenotypic approach to ontogenesis is methodologically the most perspective for evolutionary developmental biology.     

Mouse models and the evolutionary developmental biology of the skull

Understanding development is relevant to understanding evolutionbecause developmental processes structure the expression ofphenotypic variation upon which natural selection acts. Advancesin developmental biology are fueling a new synthesis of developmentaland evolutionary biology, but it remains unclear how to usedevelopmental information that largely derives from a few modelorganisms to test hypotheses about the evolutionary developmentalbiology of taxa such as humans and other primates that havenot been or are not amenable to direct study through experimentaldevelopmental biology. In this article, we discuss how and whenmodel organisms like mice are useful for studying the evolutionarydevelopmental biology of even rather distantly related and morphologicallydifferent groups like primates. A productive approach is tofocus on processes that are likely to play key roles in producingevolutionarily significant phenotypic variation across a largephylogenetic range. We illustrate this approach by applyingthe analysis of craniofacial variation in mouse mutant modelsto primate and human evolution.     

Evolutionary neurobiology

The chasm that formerly separated evolutionary biology from the research of physiologists and developmental biologists has been partially bridged in recent years. An increasing amount of research in the neurosciences makes explicit reference to issues in evolutionary biology. Much of this research is an attempt to understand structures and functions of the brain as adaptations to an animal's physical and social environment. In addition, however, some of this research at the interface of evolutionary biology and neurobiology provides information on internal evolutionary factors and the way they may constrain evolution by natural selection.     

花、基因、禾本科

进化发育生物学的一个重要任务就是揭示形态多样性的分子基础,该领域的研究包含形态、形态发育相关基因和形态所属类群等三个要素。花/花序是进化发育生物学研究的首要对象,系统发育重建和个体发育剖析的结合将促进认知花的形态进化。发育相关基因的进化表现为等位基因遗传或表观遗传的突变,基因家族生与死的进化,不同基因组拥有独特的基因。运用形态学或序列分析方法很大程度揭示了禾本科植物花进化过程中的基因进化。试从学科问题、思路方法以及具体例子介绍植物进化发育生物学。