Evolution of development in closely related species of flies and worms

Nature Reviews Genetics

Volumn 3, Issue 12, 2002, Pages 907-917

  Simpson, Pat ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CELL LINEAGE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEVELOPMENT; EVOLUTION; FLY; GENE FUNCTION; GENE IDENTIFICATION; MOLECULAR EVOLUTION; MORPHOLOGY; NATURAL POPULATION; NONHUMAN; PHENOTYPE; PHYLOGENY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FUNCTION; REGULATOR GENE; REVIEW; SPECIES DIFFERENTIATION; WORM;

ANIMALS; CAENORHABDITIS ELEGANS; CAENORHABDITIS ELEGANS PROTEINS; DNA-BINDING PROTEINS; DROSOPHILA MELANOGASTER; DROSOPHILA PROTEINS; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION, DEVELOPMENTAL; HOMEODOMAIN PROTEINS; PHYLOGENY; PROMOTER REGIONS (GENETICS); TRANS-ACTIVATORS; TRANSCRIPTION FACTORS;

EID: 0036896383     PISSN: 14710056     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrg947     Document Type: Review

References (108)

1. Mackay, T. F. & Langley, C. H. Molecular and phenotypic variation in the achaete-scute region of Drosophila melanogaster. Nature 348, 64-66 (1990).
2. Long, A. D. et al. High resolution mapping of genetic factors affecting abdominal bristle number in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 139, 1273-1291 (1995).
3. True, J. R., Liu, J., Stam, F., Zeng, Z. B. & Laurie, C. C. Quantitative genetic analysis of divergence on male secondary sexual traits between Drosophila simulans and Drosophila mauritiana. Evolution 51, 816-832 (1997).
4. Lai, C., Lyman, R. F., Long, A. D., Langley, C. H. & Mackay, T. F. Naturally occurring variation in bristle number and DNA polymorphisms at the scabrous locus of Drosophila melanogaster. Science 266, 1697-1702 (1994).
5. Long, A. D., Lyman, R. F., Langley, C. H. & Mackay, T. F. Two sites in the Delta gene region contribute to naturally occurring variation in bristle number in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 149, 999-1017 (1998).
6. Barton, N. H. & Keightley, P. D. Understanding quantitative genetic variation. Nature Rev. Genet. 3, 11-21 (2002).
7. Mackay, T. F. Quantitative trait loci in Drosophila. Nature Rev. Genet. 2, 11-20 (2001).
8. Stern, D. L. Evolutionary developmental biology and the problem of variation. Evolution Int. J. Org. Evolution 54, 1079-1091 (2000).
9. Arnone, M. I. & Davidson, E. H. The hardwiring of development: Organization and function of genomic regulatory systems. Development 124, 1851-1864 (1997).
10. Carroll, S., Grenier, J. K. & Weatherbee, S. D, in From DNA to Diversity (ed. Carroll, S.) 1-214 (Blackwell Science, London, 2001).
11. Cohn, M. J. & Tickle, C. Developmental basis of limblessness and axial patterning in snakes. Nature 399, 474-479 (1999).
12. Averof, M. & Patel, N. H. Crustacean appendage evolution associated with changes in Hox gene expression. Nature 388, 682-686 (1997).
13. Abzhanov, A. & Kaufman, T. C. Novel regulation of the homeotic gene Scr associated with a crustacean leg-to-maxilliped appendage transformation. Development 126, 1121-1128 (1999).
14. De Robertis, E. M. & Sasai, Y. A common plan for dorsoventral patterning in Bilateria. Nature 380, 37-40 (1996).
15. Keys, D. N. et al. Recruitment of a hedgehog regulatory circuit in butterfly eyespot evolution. Science 283, 532-534 (1999).
16. Britten, R. J. & Davidson, E. H. Gene regulation for higher cells: a theory. Science 165, 349-357 (1969).
17. Britten, R. J. & Davidson, E. H. Repetitive and non-repetitive DNA sequences and a speculation on the origins of evolutionary novelty. Q. Rev. Biol. 46, 111-138 (1971).
18. Bender, W. et al. Molecular genetics of the bithorax complex in Drosophila melanogaster. Science 221, 23-29 (1983).
19. Martin, C. H. et al. Complete sequence of the bithorax complex of Drosophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 92, 8398-8402 (1995).
20. Davidson, E. H. et al. Agenomic regulatory network for development. Science 295, 1660-1678 (2002).
21. Galant, R. & Carroll, S. B. Evolution of a transcriptional repression domain in an insect Hox protein. Nature 415, 910-913 (2002).
22. Ronshaugen, M., McGinnis, N. & McGinnis, W. Hox protein mutation and macroevolution of the insect body plan. Nature 415, 914-917 (2002).
23. Shiga, Y., Yasumoto, R., Yamagata, H. & Hayashi, S. Evolving role of Antennapedia protein in arthropod limb patterning. Development 129, 3555-3561 (2002).
24. Driever, W. in The Development of Drosophila Melanogaster (eds Bate, M. & Martinez-Arias, A.) 301-324 (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, New York, 1993).
25. Rushlow, C. & Levine, M. Role of the zerknullt gene in dorsal-ventral pattern formation in Drosophila. Adv. Genet. 27, 277-307 (1990).
26. Falciani, F. et al. Class 3 Hox genes in insects and the origin of zen. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 93, 8479-8484 (1996).
27. Powers, T. P. et al. Characterization of the Hox cluster from the mosquito Anopheles gambiae (Diptera: Culicidae). Evol. Dev. 2, 311-325 (2000).
28. Stauber, M., Prell, A. & Schmidt-Ott, U. A single Hox3 gene with composite bicoid and zerknullt expression characteristics in non-Cyclorrhaphan flies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99, 274-279 (2002). Describes a single Hox3 gene from basal species of Diptera and finds an interesting correlation between gene duplication at this locus with changes in early embryonic development In flies.
29. Schröder, R. & Sander, R. A comparison of transplantable Bicoid activity and partial Bicoid homeobox sequences in several Drosophila and blowfly species. Roux's Arch. Dev. Biol. 203, 34-43 (1993).
30. Stauber, M., Jackle, H. & Schmidt-Ott, U. The anterior determinant bicoid of Drosophila is a derived Hox class 3 gene. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96, 3786-3789 (1999).
31. Brown, S. et al. A strategy for mapping bicoid on the phylogenetic tree. Curr. Biol. 11, R43-R44 (2001).
32. Pankratz, M. J. & Jäckle, H. in The Development of Drosophila Melanogaster (eds Bate, M. & Martinez-Arias, A.) 467-516 (Cold Spiring Harbor Laboratory Press, New York, 1993).
33. Rivera-Pomar, R., Niessing, D., Schmidt-Ott, U., Gehring, W. J. & Jackle, H. RNA binding and translational suppression by bicoid. Nature 379, 746-749 (1996).
34. Chan, S. K. & Struhl, G. Sequence-specific RNA binding by bicoid. Nature 388, 634 (1997).
35. Niessing, D. et al. Homeodomain position 54 specifies transcriptional versus translational control by Bicoid. Mol. Cell 5, 395-401 (2000).
36. Dubnau, J. & Struhl, G. RNA recognition and translational regulation by a homeodomain protein. Nature 379, 694-699 (1996).
37. Rozowski, M. & Akam, M. Hox gene control of segment-specific bristle patterns in Drosophila. Genes Dev. 16, 1150-1162 (2002).
38. Stem, D. L. A role of Ultrabithorax in morphological differences between Drosophila species. Nature 396, 46, 3-466 (1998). Relates a subtle morphological difference in leg morphology with evolution of the cis-regulatory sequences at the Ubx locus.
39. Wang, B. B. et al. A homeotic gene cluster patterns the anteroposterior body axis of C. elegans. Cell 74, 29-42 (1993).
40. Sulston, J. E., Schierenberg, E., White, J. G. & Thomson, J. N. The embryonic cell lineage of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Dev. Biol. 100, 64-119 (1983).
41. Greenwald, I. in C. elegans II (eds Riddle, D. L., Blumenthal, T., Meyer, B. J. & Priess, J. R.) 519-542 (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, New York, 1997).
42. Sigrist, C. B. & Sommer, R. J. Vulva formation in Pristionchus pacificus relies on continuous gonadal induction. Dev. Genes Evol. 209, 451-459 (1999).
43. Eizinger, A., Jungblut, B. & Sommer, R. J. Evolutionary change in the functional specificity of genes. Trends Genet. 15, 197-202 (1999).
44. Clark, S. G., Chisholm, A. D. & Horvitz, H. R. Control of cell fates in the central body region of C. elegans by the homeobox gene lin-39. Cell 74, 43-55 (1993).
45. Clandinin, T. R., Katz, W. S. & Sternberg, P. W. Caenorhabditis elegans HOM-C genes regulate the response of vulval precursor cells to inductive signal. Dev. Biol. 182, 150-161 (1997).
46. Grandien, K. & Sommer, R. J. Functional companson of the nematode Hox gene lin-39 in C. elegans and P. pacificus reveals evolutionary conservation of protein function despite divergence of primary sequences. Genes Dev. 15, 2161-2172 (2001). The difference in the function of lin-39 between these two nematode species is shown to arise from changes in the cellular context in which it acts.
47. Kopp, A., Duncan, I., Godt, D. & Carroll, S. B. Genetic control and evolution of sexually dimorphic characters in Drosophila. Nature 408, 553-559 (2000). A remarkable study showing that recent regulatory inputs at the bab gene are important in the evolution of sexual dimorphism in pigment patterns.
48. Kopp, A. & Duncan, I. Control of cell fate and polarity in the adult abdominal segments of Drosophila by optomotor-blind. Development 124, 3715-3726 (1997)
49. Sucena, E. & Stern, D. L. Divergence of larval morphology between Drosophila sechellia and its sibling species caused by cis-regulatory evolution of ovo/shaven-baby. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97, 4530-4534 (2000). A hybrid analysis between closely related species of drosophilids was used to identify the gene responsible for a discrete difference in larval phenotype.
50. Mevel-Ninio, M., Terracol, P. & Kafatos, F. C. The ovo gene of Drosophila encodes a zinc finger protein required for female germ line development. EMBO J. 10, 2259-2266 (1991).
51. Payre, F., Vincent, A. & Carreno, S. Ovo/svb integrates Wingless and DER pathways to control epidermis differentiation. Nature 400, 271-275 (1999).
52. Kimura, M. in The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution 1-367 (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1983).
53. Rutherford, S. L. & Undquist, S. Hsp90 as a capacitor for morphological evolution. Nature 396, 336-342 (1998).
54. Queitsch, C., Sangster, T. A. & Lindquist, S. Hsp90 as a capacitor of phenotypic variation. Nature 417, 618-624 (2002).
55. Gibson, G. & Hogness, D. S. Effect of polymorphism in the Drosophila regulatory gene Ultrabithorax on homeotic stability. Science 271, 200-203 (1996).
56. Gibson, G., Wemple, M. & van Helden, S. Potential variance affecting homeotic Ultrabithorax and Antennapedia phenotypes in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 151, 1081-1091 (1999).
57. Hancock, J. M., Shaw, P. J., Bonneton, F. & Dover, G. A. High sequence turnover in the regulatory regions of the developmental gene hunchback in insects. Mol. Biol. Evol. 16, 253-265 (1999).
58. Treier, M., Pfeifle, C. & Tautz, D. Comparison of the gap segmentation gene hunchback between Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila viritis reveals novel modes of evolutionary change. EMBO J. 8, 1517-1525 (1989).
59. Ludwig, M. Z., Bergman, C., Patel, N. H. & Kreitman, M. Evidence for stabilizing selection in a eukaryotic enhancer element. Nature 403, 564-567 (2000). A study of chimeric enhancers from a regulatory region of the even-skipped gene of closely related Drosophila spp. provides evidence for stabilizing selection. The authors predict that many regulatory elements will be subject to sequence substitutions, which might have far-reaching consequences.
60. Small, S., Blair, A. & Levine, M. Regulation of even-skipped stripe 2 in the Drosophila embryo. EMBO J. 11, 4047-4057 (1992).
61. Arnosti, D. N., Barolo, S., Levine, M. & Small, S. The eve stripe 2 enhancer employs multiple modes of transcriptional synergy. Development 122, 205-214 (1996).
62. Ludwig, M. Z., Patel, N. H. & Kreitman, M. Functional analysis of eve stripe 2 enhancer evolution in Drosophila: Rules governing conservation and change. Development 125, 949-958 (1998).
63. Ludwig, M. Z. & Kreitman, M. Evolutionary dynamics of the enhancer region of even-skipped in Drosophila. Mol. Biol. Evol. 12, 1002-1011 (1995).
64. Sackerson, C. Patterns of conservation and divergence at the even-skipped locus of Drosophila. Mech. Dev. 51, 199-215 (1995).
65. Dover, G. A. & Flavell, R. B. Molecular coevolution: DNA divergence and the maintenance of function. Cell 38, 622-623 (1984).
66. Dover, G. How genomic and developmental dynamics affect evolutionary processes. Bioessays 22, 1153-1159 (2000).
67. Skaer, N. & Simpson, P. Genetic analysis of bristle loss in hybrids between Drosophila melanogaster and D. simulans provides evidence for divergence of cis-regulatory sequences in the achaete-scute gene complex. Dev. Biol. 221, 148-167 (2000).
68. Driever, W. & Nusslein-Volhard, C. The bicoid protein is a positive regulator of hunchback transcription in the early Drosophila embryo. Nature 337, 138-143 (1989).
69. Struhl, G., Struhl, K. & Macdonald, P. M. The gradient morphogen bicoid is a concentration-dependent transcriptional activator. Cell 57, 1259-1273 (1989).
70. Sommer, R. & Tautz, D. Segmentation gene expression in the housefly Musca domestica. Development 113, 419-430 (1991).
71. Bonneton, F., Shaw, P. J., Fazakerley, C., Shi, M. & Dover, G. A. Comparison of bicoid-dependent regulation of hunchback between Musca domestica and Drosophila melanogaster. Mech. Dev. 66, 143-156 (1997).
72. Lukowitz, W., Schroder, C., Glaser, G., Hulskamp, M. & Tautz, D. Regulatory and coding regions of the segmentation gene hunchback are functionally conserved between Drosophila virilis and Drosophila melanogaster. Mech. Dev. 45, 105-115 (1994).
73. McGregor, A. P. et al. Rapid restructuring of bicoid-dependent hunchback promoters within and between Dipteran species: Implications for molecular coevolution. Evol. Dev. 3, 397-407 (2001). A comparison of the hunchback promoter between Dipteran species, providing evidence for co-evolution of selected compensatory mutations in cis and trans in response to continuous promoter restructuring.
74. Hanes, S. D., Riddihough, G., Ish-Horowicz, D. & Brent, R. Specific DNA recognition and intersite spacing are critical for action of the bicoid morphogen. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 3364-3375 (1994).
75. Ma, X., Yuan, D., Diepold, K., Scarborough, T. & Ma, J. The Drosophila morphogenetic protein Bicoid binds DNA cooperatively. Development 122, 1195-1206 (1996).
76. Shaw, P. J., Salameh, A., McGregor, A. P., Bala, S. & Dover, G. A. Divergent structure and function of the bicoid gene in Muscoidea fly species. Evol. Dev. 3, 251-262 (2001).
77. Shaw, P. J., Wratten, N. S., McGregor, A. P. & Dover, G. A. Coevolution in bicoid-dependent promoters and the inception of regulatory incompatibilities among species of higher Diptera. Evol. Dev. 4, 265-277 (2002).
78. Katz, W. S., Hill, R. J., Clandinin, T. R. & Sternberg, P. W. Different levels of the C. elegans growth factor LIN-3 promote distinct vulval precursor fates. Cell 82, 297-307 (1995).
79. Simske, J. S. & Kim, S. K. Sequential signalling during Caenorhabditis elegans vulval induction. Nature 375, 142-146 (1995).
80. Kenyon, C. A perfect vulva every time: Gradients and signaling cascades in C. elegans. Cell 82, 171-174 (1995).
81. Lu, X. & Horvitz, H. R. Lin-35 and lin-53, two genes that antagonize a C. elegans Ras pathway, encode proteins similar to Rb and its binding protein RbAp48. Cell 95, 981-991 (1998).
82. Thomas, J. H. Thinking about genetic redundancy. Trends Genet. 9, 395-399 (1993).
83. Felix, M. A. et al. Evolution of vulva development in the Cephalobina (Nematoda). Dev. Biol. 221, 68-86 (2000).
84. Sommer, R. J. & Sternberg, P. W. Apoptosis and change of competence limit the size of the vulva equivalence group in Pristionchus pacificus: A genetic analysis. Curr. Biol. 6, 52-59 (1996).
85. Sommer, R. J., Carta, L. K., Kim, S. Y. & Sternberg, P. W. Morphological, genetic and molecular description of Pristionchus pacificus: A genetic analysis. Fund. Appl. Nemat. 19, 511-521 (1996).
86. Sommer, R. J. Evolutionary changes of developmental mechanisms in the absence of cell lineage alterations during vulva formation in the Diplogastridae (Nematoda). Development 124, 243-251 (1997).
87. Jungblut, B. & Sommer, R. J. Novel cell-cell interactions during vulva development in Pristionchus pacificus. Development 127, 3295-3303 (2000). Describes unusual cell interactions that are involved in vulval development of P. pacificus that differ from those used In C. elegans and their redundancy.
88. Srinivasan, J. et al. Microevolutionary analysis of the nematode genus Pristionchus suggests a recent evolution of redundant developmental mechanisms during vulva formation. Evol. Dev. 3, 229-240 (2001). The authors have examined 13 strains of worms from the genus Pristionchus and show that differences in development of the vulva are due to a small number of changes in developmental control genes.
89. Fay, D. S. & Han, M. Mutations in cye-1, a Caenorhabditis elegans cyclin E homolog, reveal coordination between cell-cycle control and vulval development. Development 121, 4049-4060 (2000).
90. Delattre, M. & Felix, M. A. Polymorphism and evolution of vulval precursor cell lineages within two nematode genera. Caenorhabditis and Oscheius. Curr. Biol. 11, 631-643 (2001). This study describes polymorphisms in the lineages of vulval precursor cells both within and between worm species and shows a link between natural variability and rapid evolution.
91. Dichtel, M. L., Louvet-Vallee, S., Viney, M. E., Felix, M. A. & Sternberg, P. W. Control of vulval cell division number in the nematode Oscheius/Dolichorhabditis sp. CEW1. Genetics 157, 183-197 (2001). Mutants that affect the division, but not the fate, of vulval precursor cells, have been isolated with ease in species of Oscheius and Dolichorhabditis, showing that, in contrast to C. elegans, these two processes are not tightly linked in these species.
92. Waddington, C. H. Canalization of development and inheritance of acquired factors. Nature 150, 563-565 (1942).
93. Gibson, G. & Wagner, G. Canalization in evolutionary genetics: A stabilizing theory? Bioessays 22, 372-380 (2000).
94. Sommer, R. J. As good as they get: Cells in nematode vulva development and evolution. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 13, 715-720 (2001).
95. Schnabel, R. Why does a nematode have an invariant cell lineage? Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 8, 341-349 (1997).
96. Labouesse, M. & Mango, S. E. Patterning the C. elegans embryo: Moving beyond the cell lineage. Trends Genet. 15, 307-313 (1999).
97. Voronov, D. A. & Panchin, Y. V. Cell lineage in marine nematode Enoplus brevis. Development 125, 143-150 (1998).
98. Kimble, J. Alterations in cell lineage following laser ablation of cells in the somatic gonad of Caenorhabditis elegans. Dev. Biol. 87, 286-300 (1981).
99. Maloof, J. N. & Kenyon, C. The Hox gene lin-39 is required during C. elegans vulval induction to select the outcome of Ras signaling. Development 125, 181-190 (1998).
100. Eisenmann, D. M., Maloof, J. N., Simske, J. S., Kenyon, C. & Kim, S. K. The β-catenin homolog BAR-1 and LET-60 Ras coordinately regulate the Hox gene lin-39 during Caenorhabditis elegans vulval development. Development 125, 3667-3680 (1998).
101. Hill, R. J. & Sternberg, P. W. The gene lin-3 encodes an inductive signal for vulval development in C. elegans. Nature 358, 470-476 (1992).
102. Eizinger, A. & Sommer, R. J. The homeotic gene lin-39 and the evolution of nematode epidermal cell fates. Science 278, 452-455 (1997).
103. Sommer, P. J. et al. The Pristionchus HOXgene Ppa-lin-39 inhibits programmed cell death to specify the vulva equivalence group and is not required during vulval induction. Development 125, 3865-3873 (1998).
104. Peixoto, A. A. et al. Molecular coevolution within a Drosophila clock gene. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95, 4475-4480 (1998).
105. Maier, D., Preiss, A. & Powell, J. R. Regulation of the segmentation gene fushi tarazu has been functionally conserved in Drosophila. EMBO J. 9, 3957-3966 (1990).
106. Langeland, J. A. & Carroll, S. B. Conservation of regulatory elements controlling hairy pair-rule stripe formation. Development 117, 585-596 (1993).
107. Williams, J. A., Paddock, S. W., Vorwerk, K. & Carroll, S. B. Organization of wing formation and induction of a wing-patterning gene at the dorsal/ventral compartment boundary. Nature 888, 299-305 (1994).
108. Kim, J. Macro-evolution of the hairy enhancer in Drosophila species. J. Exp. Zool. 291, 175-185 (2001).