Streaming the latest papers about evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo).
Posts are unlisted due to instance policy and won't show up in public timelines or in hashtag searches. Boosting is the only way that posts can get to people who don't follow the bot.
Please boost the papers you find worth sharing! And like them if you liked them :)
Questions or suggestions? Ping me @bruvellu
| Website | https://evodevo.brunovellutini.com |
| Code | https://github.com/bruvellu/evodevo-papers |
| Maintainer | @bruvellu |
Dear friends of evo-devo,
botsin.space, the instance hosting this account, will retire next month.
I'm migrating to a new instance in the near future. Follows will be updated automatically, no action needed from your side. I'll post again after the move.
See you soon,
Bruno
Background Early embryogenesis is characterized by dramatic cell proliferation and movement. In most insects, early embryogenesis includes a phase called the uniform blastoderm, during which cells evenly cover the entirety of the egg. However, the embryo of the German cockroach, Blattella germanica, like those of many insects within the super order Polyneoptera, does not have a uniform blastoderm; instead, its first cells condense rapidly at the site of a future germband. We investigated early development in this species in order to understand how early gene expression is or is not conserved in these insect embryos with distinct early cell behaviors. Results We present a detailed time series of nuclear division and distribution from fertilization through germband formation and report patterns of expression for the early patterning genes hunchback, caudal, and twist in order to understand early polarization and mesoderm formation. We show a detailed time course of the spatial expression of two genes involved in the segmentation cascade, hedgehog and even-skipped, and demonstrate two distinct dynamics of the segmentation process. Conclusions Despite dramatic differences in cell distribution between the blastoderms of many Polyneopteran insects and those of more well-studied developmental models, expression patterns of early patterning genes are mostly similar. Genes associated with axis determination in other insects are activated relatively late and are probably not maternally deposited. The two phases of segmentation—simultaneous and sequential—might indicate a broadly conserved mode of morphological differentiation. The developmental time course we present here should be of value for further investigation into the causes of this distinct blastoderm type.
Background Previous studies have reported that periderm (the outer ectodermal layer) in zebrafish partially expands into the mouth and pharyngeal pouches, but does not reach the medial endoderm, where the pharyngeal teeth develop. Instead, periderm-like cells, arising independently from the outer periderm, cover prospective tooth-forming epithelia and are crucial for tooth germ initiation. Here we test the hypothesis that restricted expansion of periderm is a teleost-specific character possibly related to the derived way of early embryonic development. To this end, we performed lineage tracing of the periderm in a non-teleost actinopterygian species possessing pharyngeal teeth, the sterlet sturgeon (Acipenser ruthenus), and a sarcopterygian species lacking pharyngeal teeth, the axolotl (Ambystoma mexicanum). Results In sturgeon, a stratified ectoderm is firmly established at the end of gastrulation, with minimally a basal ectodermal layer and a surface layer that can be homologized to a periderm. Periderm expands to a limited extent into the mouth and remains restricted to the distal parts of the pouches. It does not reach the medial pharyngeal endoderm, where pharyngeal teeth are located. Thus, periderm in sturgeon covers prospective odontogenic epithelium in the jaw region (oral teeth) but not in the pharyngeal region. In axolotl, like in sturgeon, periderm expansion in the oropharynx is restricted to the distal parts of the opening pouches. Oral teeth in axolotl develop long before mouth opening and possible expansion of the periderm into the mouth cavity. Conclusions Restricted periderm expansion into the oropharynx appears to be an ancestral feature for osteichthyans, as it is found in sturgeon, zebrafish and axolotl. Periderm behavior does not correlate with presence or absence of oral or pharyngeal teeth, whose induction may depend on ‘ectodermalized’ endoderm. It is proposed that periderm assists in lumenization of the pouches to create an open gill slit. Comparison of basal and advanced actinopterygians with sarcopterygians (axolotl) shows that different trajectories of embryonic development converge on similar dynamics of the periderm: a restricted expansion into the mouth and prospective gill slits.
Hox genes are transcriptional regulators that elicit cell positional identity along the anterior–posterior region of the body plan across different lineages of Metazoan. Comparison of Hox gene expression across distinct species reveals their evolutionary conservation; however, their gains and losses in different lineages can correlate with body plan modifications and morphological novelty. We compare the expression of 11 Hox genes found within Streblospio benedicti, a marine annelid that produces two types of offspring with distinct developmental and morphological features. For these two distinct larval types, we compare Hox gene expression through ontogeny using hybridization chain reaction (HCR) probes for in situ hybridization and RNA-seq data. We find that Hox gene expression patterning for both types is typically similar at equivalent developmental stages. However, some Hox genes have spatial or temporal differences between the larval types that are associated with morphological and life-history differences. This is the first comparison of developmental divergence in Hox gene expression within a single species and these changes reveal how body plan differences may arise in larval evolution.
Background Spiders evolved different types of eyes, a pair of primary eyes that are usually forward pointing, and three pairs of secondary eyes that are typically situated more posterior and lateral on the spider’s head. The best understanding of arthropod eye development comes from the vinegar fly Drosophila melanogaster, the main arthropod model organism, that also evolved different types of eyes, the larval eyes and the ocelli and compound eyes of the imago. The gene regulatory networks that underlie eye development in this species are well investigated revealing a conserved core network, but also show several differences between the different types of eyes. Recent candidate gene approaches identified a number of conserved genes in arthropod eye development, but also revealed crucial differences including the apparent lack of some key factors in some groups of arthropods, including spiders. Results Here, we re-analysed our published scRNA sequencing data and found potential key regulators of spider eye development that were previously overlooked. Unlike earlier research on this topic, our new data suggest that Hedgehog (Hh)-signalling is involved in eye development in the spider Parasteatoda tepidariorum. By investigating embryonic gene expression in representatives of all main groups of spiders, we demonstrate that this involvement is conserved in spiders. Additionally, we identified genes that are expressed in the developing eyes of spiders, but that have not been studied in this context before. Conclusion Our data show that single-cell sequencing represents a powerful method to gain deeper insight into gene regulatory networks that underlie the development of lineage-specific organs such as the derived set of eyes in spiders. Overall, we gained deeper insight into spider eye development, as well as the evolution of arthropod visual system formation.