Hox genes in a pentameral animal

There is renewed interest in how the different body plans of extant phyla are related. This question has traditionally been addressed by comparisons between vertebrates and Drosophila. Fortunately, there is now increasing emphasis on animals representing other phyla. Pentamerally symmetric echinoderms are a bilaterian metazoan phylum whose members exhibit secondarily derived radial symmetry. Precisely how their radially symmetric body plan originated from a bilaterally symmetric ancestor is unknown, however, two recent papers address this subject. Peterson et al. propose a hypothesis on evolution of the anteroposterior axis in echinoderms, and Arenas-Mena et al. examine expression of five posterior Hox genes during development of the adult sea urchin.     

Two more Posterior Hox genes and Hox cluster dispersal in echinoderms

Background

Hox genes are key elements in patterning animal development. They are renowned for their, often, clustered organisation in the genome, with supposed mechanistic links between the organisation of the genes and their expression. The widespread distribution and comparable functions of Hox genes across the animals has led to them being a major study system for comparing the molecular bases for construction and divergence of animal morphologies. Echinoderms (including sea urchins, sea stars, sea cucumbers, feather stars and brittle stars) possess one of the most unusual body plans in the animal kingdom with pronounced pentameral symmetry in the adults. Consequently, much interest has focused on their development, evolution and the role of the Hox genes in these processes. In this context, the organisation of echinoderm Hox gene clusters is distinctive. Within the classificatory system of Duboule, echinoderms constitute one of the clearest examples of Disorganized (D) clusters (i.e. intact clusters but with a gene order or orientation rearranged relative to the ancestral state).

Results

Here we describe two Hox genes (Hox11/13d and e) that have been overlooked in most previous work and have not been considered in reconstructions of echinoderm Hox complements and cluster organisation. The two genes are related to Posterior Hox genes and are present in all classes of echinoderm. Importantly, they do not reside in the Hox cluster of any species for which genomic linkage data is available.

Conclusion

Incorporating the two neglected Posterior Hox genes into assessments of echinoderm Hox gene complements and organisation shows that these animals in fact have Split (S) Hox clusters rather than simply Disorganized (D) clusters within the Duboule classification scheme. This then has implications for how these genes are likely regulated, with them no longer covered by any potential long-range Hox cluster-wide, or multigenic sub-cluster, regulatory mechanisms.

     

Hox基因与昆虫翅的特化

自从1978年E.B. Lewis描述了著名的果蝇双胸突变体（bithorax）以来,大量的比较发育遗传学研究为我们揭示了形态进化的遗传基础,从而使形态进化研究进入了一个新的时代。同时,Hox基因的研究也成为这一领域的焦点。本文综述了昆虫翅的起源及其特化类群翅的发育遗传学研究的最新进展。一般认为,原始的有翅昆虫胸腹部多附肢（包括翅）; 之后不同的体节受到了不同Hox的抑制,形成两对翅以及前后翅的分化; Ubx的不同表达导致了前后翅的分化,并且Ubx负责识别后翅。我们选择翅特化最为显著的3个类群——鞘翅目（T2鞘翅）、双翅目（T3平衡棒）和捻翅目（T2平衡棒）,结合Hox的表达情况讨论了翅的特化机理。目前已知双翅目和鞘翅目的翅的控制模式存在巨大差异,两种模式的比较研究对于理解翅的形态进化具有重要的意义。但是对捻翅目昆虫的研究则很少。     

Isolation of Hox and Parahox genes in the hemichordate Ptychodera flava and the evolution of deuterostome Hox genes

Because of their importance for proper development of the bilaterian embryo, Hox genes have taken center stage for investigations into the evolution of bilaterian metazoans. Taxonomic surveys of major protostome taxa have shown that Hox genes are also excellent phylogenetic markers, as specific Hox genes are restricted to one of the two great protostome clades, the Lophotrochozoa or the Ecdysozoa, and thus support the phylogenetic relationships as originally deduced by 18S rDNA studies. Deuterostomes are the third major group of bilaterians and consist of three major phyla, the echinoderms, the hemichordates, and the chordates. Most morphological studies have supported Hemichordata+Chordata, whereas molecular studies support Echinodermata+Hemichordata, a clade known as Ambulacraria. To test these competing hypotheses, complete or near complete cDNAs of eight Hox genes and four Parahox genes were isolated from the enteropneust hemichordate Ptychodera flava. Only one copy of each Hox gene was isolated suggesting that the Hox genes of P. flava are arranged in a single cluster. Of particular importance is the isolation of three posterior or Abd-B Hox genes; these genes are only shared with echinoderms, and thus support the monophyly of Ambulacraria.     

Hox genes in digit development and evolution

Homeobox genes located in the 5' part of the HoxA and HoxD complexes are required for proliferation of skeletal progenitor cells of the vertebrate limb. Specific combinations of gene products determine the length of the upper arm (genes belonging to groups 9 and 10), the lower arm (groups 10, 11 and 12) and the digits (groups 11, 12 and 13). In these different domains, individual gene products quantitatively contribute to an overall protein dose, with predominant roles for groups 11 and 13. Quantitative reduction in the gene dose in each set results in truncations of the corresponding anatomical regions. The physical order of the genes in the HoxA and HoxD complexes, as well as a unidirectional sequence in gene activation, allow for completion of the process in a precise order, which in turn makes possible the sequential outgrowth of the respective primordia. While the skeletal patterns of upper and lower limb are relatively stable throughout the tetrapods, more variation is seen in the digits. Molecular analysis of the underlying regulatory processes promises further exciting insights into the genetic control of development, pathology and the course of evolution.     

Hox and paraHox genes in bivalve molluscs

In this study, we sought the presence and analysed the sequences of the Hox and ParaHox genes in bivalve molluscs. The clustered Hox genes play a central role in anterior-posterior axial patterning in bilaterian metazoa, whereas the ParaHox gene cluster is a paralogue (evolutionary sister) of the Hox cluster.Using polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based approaches, we isolated nine different sequences in five species belonging to three of the main bivalve subclasses: Ensis ensis and Tapes philippinarum (Heterodonta), Pecten maximus and Mytilus galloprovincialis (Pteriomorphia), and Yoldia eightsi (Protobranchia). Comparison with the Hox and ParaHox genes of other bilaterians, particularly lophotrochozoans, allowed us to attribute six of these sequences to the Hox gene cluster (one to paralog group [PG] 3 class, and five to the central class), two to the ParaHox cluster and one to the Gbx gene family.The results of our investigation seem to indicate that homeotic Hox and ParaHox gene clusters are homogeneous for both presence and characteristics in molluscs.     

Hox genes and the crustacean body plan

The Crustacea present a variety of body plans not encountered in any other class or phylum of the Metazoa. Here we review our current knowledge on the complement and expression of the Hox genes in Crustacea, addressing questions related to the evolution of body architecture. Specifically, we discuss the molecular mechanisms underlying the homeotic transformation of legs into feeding appendages, which occurred in parallel in several branches of the crustacean evolutionary tree. A second issue that can be approached by the comparative study of Hox genes and their expression in the Crustacea bears on the homology of the abdomen. We discuss whether the so-called "abdominal" tagma of the crustaceans is homologous to the abdomen of insects. In addition, the homology of the abdomen between malacostracan and non-malacostracan crustaceans has also been questioned. We also address the question of the molecular developmental basis of the apparent lack of an abdomen in barnacles. We discuss these issues in relation to the problem of constraint versus adaptation in evolution.     

Sea urchin Hox genes: insights into the ancestral Hox cluster

We describe the Hox cluster in the radially symmetric sea urchin and compare our findings to what is known from clusters in bilaterally symmetric animals. Several Hox genes from the direct-developing sea urchin Heliocidaris erythrogramma are described. CHEF gel analysis shows that the Hox genes are clustered on a < or = 300 kilobase (kb) fragment of DNA, and only a single cluster is present, as in lower chordates and other nonvertebrate metazoans. Phylogenetic analyses of sea urchin, amphioxus, Drosophila, and selected vertebrate Hox genes confirm that the H. erythrogramma genes, and others previously cloned from other sea urchins, belong to anterior, central, and posterior groups. Despite their radial body plan and lack of cephalization, echinoderms retain at least one of the anterior group Hox genes, an orthologue of Hox3. The structure of the echinoderm Hox cluster suggests that the ancestral deuterostome had a Hox cluster more similar to the current chordate cluster than was expected Sea urchins have at least three Abd-B type genes, suggesting that Abd-B expansion began before the radiation of deuterostomes.      

Fast sequence evolution of Hox and Hox -derived genes in the genus Drosophila

Background  

It is expected that genes that are expressed early in development and have a complex expression pattern are under strong purifying selection and thus evolve slowly. Hox genes fulfill these criteria and thus, should have a low evolutionary rate. However, some observations point to a completely different scenario. Hox genes are usually highly conserved inside the homeobox, but very variable outside it.     

Why are Hox genes clustered?

The evolutionarily conserved genomic organization of the Hox genes has been a puzzle ever since it was discovered that their order along the chromosome is similar to the order of their functional domains along the antero-posterior axis. Why has this colinearity been maintained throughout evolution? A close look at regulatory sequences from the mouse Hox clusters^(1,2) suggests that enhancer sharing between adjacent Hox genes may be one reason. Moreover, characterizing the activity of one of these mouse enhancers in Drosophila⁽²⁾ illustrates that despite many similarities, not all Hox clusters are built in the same way.     

Hox genes are not always Colinear

The deuterostomes are the clade of animals for which we have the most detailed understanding of Hox cluster organisation. With the Hox cluster of amphioxus (Branchiostoma floridae) we have the best prototypical, least derived Hox cluster for the group, whilst the urochordates present us with some of the most highly derived and disintegrated clusters. Combined with the detailed mechanistic understanding of vertebrate Hox regulation, the deuterostomes provide much of the most useful data for understanding Hox cluster evolution. Considering both the prototypical and derived deuterostome Hox clusters leads us to hypothesize that Temporal Colinearity is the main constraining force on Hox cluster organisation, but until we have a much deeper understanding of the mechanistic basis for this phenomenon, and know how widespread across the Bilateria the mechanism(s) is/are, then we cannot know how the Hox cluster of the last common bilaterian operated and what have been the major evolutionary forces operating upon the Hox gene cluster.     

Novel interactions between vertebrate Hox genes

Understanding why metazoan Hox/HOM-C genes are expressed in spatiotemporal sequences showing colinearity with their genomic sequence is a central challenge in developmental biology. Here, we studied the consequences of ectopically expressing Hox genes to investigate whether Hox-Hox interactions might help to order gene expression during very early vertebrate embryogenesis. Our study revealed conserved autoregulatory loops for the Hox4 and Hox7 paralogue groups, detected following ectopic expression Hoxb-4 or HOXD4, and Hoxa-7, respectively. We also detected specific induction of 5' posterior Hox genes; Hoxb-5 to Hoxb-9, following ectopic expression of Hoxb-4/HOXD4; Hoxb-8 and Hoxb-9 following ectopic expression of Hoxa-7. Additionally, we observed specific repression of 3' anterior genes, following ectopic expression of Hox4 and Hox7 paralogues. We found that induction of Hoxb-4 and Hoxb-5 by Hoxb-4 can be direct, whereas induction of Hoxb-7 is indirect, suggesting the possibility of an activating cascade. Finally, we found that activation of Hoxb-4 itself and of posterior Hox genes by Hoxb-4 can be both non-cell-autonomous, as well as direct. We believe that our findings could be important for understanding how a highly ordered Hox expression sequence is set up in the early vertebrate embryo.     

Additional duplicated Hox genes in the earthworm: Perionyx excavatus Hox genes consist of eleven paralog groups

Annelida is a lophotrochozoan phylum whose members have a high degree of diversity in body plan morphology, reproductive strategies and ecological niches among others.Of the two traditional classes pertaining to the phylum Annelida (Polychaete and Clitellata), the structure and function of the Hox genes has not been clearly defined within the Oligochaeta class. Using a PCR-based survey, we were able to identify five new Hox genes from the earthworm Perionyx excavatus: a Hox3 gene (Pex-Hox3b), two Dfd genes (Pex-Lox6 and Pex-Lox18), and two posterior genes (Pex-post1 and -post2a). Our result suggests that the eleven earthworm Hox genes contain at least four paralog groups (PG) that have duplicated. We found the clitellates-diagnostic signature residues and annelid signature motif. Also, we show by semi-quantitative RT-PCR that duplicated Hox gene orthologs are differentially expressed in six different anterior-posterior body regions. These results provide essential data for comparative evolution of the Hox cluster within the Annelida.     

Hox genes and the phylogeny of the arthropods

The arthropods are the most speciose, and among the most morphologically diverse, of the animal phyla. Their evolution has been the subject of intense research for well over a century, yet the relationships among the four extant arthropod subphyla - chelicerates, crustaceans, hexapods, and myriapods - are still not fully resolved. Morphological taxonomies have often placed hexapods and myriapods together (the Atelocerata) [1, 2], but recent molecular studies have generally supported a hexapod/crustacean clade [2-9]. A cluster of regulatory genes, the Hox genes, control segment identity in arthropods, and comparisons of the sequences and functions of Hox genes can reveal evolutionary relationships [10]. We used Hox gene sequences from a range of arthropod taxa, including new data from a basal hexapod and a myriapod, to estimate a phylogeny of the arthropods. Our data support the hypothesis that insects and crustaceans form a single clade within the arthropods to the exclusion of myriapods. They also suggest that myriapods are more closely allied to the chelicerates than to this insect/crustacean clade.