Hierarchical phylogenetics as a quantitative analytical framework for evolutionary developmental biology

BioEssays

Volumn 27, Issue 11, 2005, Pages 1158-1166

  Serb, Jeanne M ^a   Oakley, Todd H ^b  

^a IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC METHOD; CELL STRUCTURE; CELL TYPE; EVOLUTIONARY DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; METHODOLOGY; NONHUMAN; PHYLOGENY; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; SPECIES IDENTIFICATION;

ANIMALS; DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY; HUMANS; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY;

EID: 30544445264     PISSN: 02659247     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bies.20291     Document Type: Review

References (64)

1. Arthur W. 2002. The emerging conceptual framework of evolutionary developmental biology. Nature 415:757-764.
2. Abzhanov A, Protas M, Grant BR, Grant PR, Tabin CJ. 2004. Bmp4 and morphological variation of beaks in Darwin's finches. Science 305:1462-1465.
3. Averof M, Patel NH. 1997. Crustacean appendage evolution associated with changes in Hox gene expression. Nature 388:682-686.
4. Gompel N, Carroll SB. 2003. Genetic mechanisms and constraints governing the evolution of correlated traits in drosophilid flies. Nature 424:931-935.
5. Wagner A. 2000. Decoupled evolution of coding region and mRNA expression patterns after gene duplication: implications for the neutralist-selectionist debate. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:6579-6584.
6. Gu Z, Nicolae D, Lu HH, Li WH. 2002. Rapid divergence in expression between duplicate genes inferred from microarray data. Trends Genet 18:609-613.
7. Oakley TH, Gu Z, Abouheif E, Patel NH, Li WH. 2005. Comparative Methods for the Analysis of Gene-Expression Evolution: An Example Using Yeast Functional Genomic Data. Mol Biol Evol 22:40-50.
8. Wray GA, Hahn MW, Abouheif E, Balhoff JP, Pizer M, et al. 2003. The evolution of transcriptional regulation in eukaryotes. Mol Biol Evol 20:1377-1419.
9. Ohno S. 1970. Evolution by gene duplication. New York: Springer-Verlag.
10. Williams NA, Holland PW. 2000. An amphioxus Emx homeobox gene reveals duplication during vertebrate evolution. Mol Biol Evol 17:1520-1528.
11. Raff RA. 1996. The Shape of Life: Genes, Development, and the Evolution of Animal Form. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Lowe CJ, Wray GA. 1997. Radical alterations in the roles of homeobox genes during echinoderm evolution [see comments] [published erratum appears in Nature 1998 Mar 5;392(66711):105], Nature 389:718-721.
13. Wilkins A. 2002. The Evolution of Developmental Pathways. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer.
14. Abouheif E. 1999. Establishing homology criteria for regulatory gene networks: prospects and challenges. Novartis Found Symp 222:207-221.
15. Richardson MK, Jeffery JE, Coates MI, Bininda-Emonds ORP. 2001. Comparative methods in developmental biology. Zoology-Analysis of Complex Systems 104:278-283.
16. Telford MJ, Budd GE. 2003. The place of phylogeny and cladistics in Evo-Devo research, Int J Dev Biol 47:479-490.
17. Mabee PM, Crotwell PL, Bird NC, Burke AC. 2002. Evolution of median fin modules in the axial skeleton of fishes. J Exp Zool 294:77-90.
18. Wray GA, Bely AE. 1994. The evolution of echinoderm development is driven by several distinct factors. Dev Suppl:97-106.
19. Arendt D. 2003. Evolution of eyes and photoreceptor cell types. Int J Dev Biol 47:563-571.
20. Geeta R. 2003. Structure trees and species trees: what they say about morphological development and evolution. Evol Dev 5:609-621.
21. Oakley TH. 2003. The eye as a replicating and diverging, modular developmental unit. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18:623-627.
22. Liu Z, Friedrich M. 2004. The Tribolium homologue of glass and the evolution of insect larval eyes. Dev Biol 269:36-54.
23. Cunchillos C, Lecointre G. 2005. Integrating the Universal Metabolism into a Phylogenetic Analysis. Mol Biol Evol 22:1-11.
24. Coates MI, Jeffery JE, Ruta M. 2002. Fins to limbs: what the fossils say. Evolution & Development 4:390-401.
25. Hall BK. 2001. The gene is not dead, merely orphaned and seeking a home. Evol Dev 3:225-228.
26. Atchley WR, Hall BK. 1991. A model for development and evolution of complex morphological structures. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 66:101-157.
27. Raff RA. 2000. Evo-devo: the evolution of a new discipline. Nat Rev Genet 1:74-79.
28. Winther RG. 2001. Varieties of modules: Kinds, levels, origins, and behaviors. Journal of Experimental Zoology 291:116-129.
29. Schlosser G, Wagner GP, editors. 2004. Modularity in Development and Evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 600 p.
30. Needham J. 1933. On the dissociability of the fundamental process in ontogenesis. Biol Rev 8:180-223.
31. Wagner GP. 1996. Homologues, natural kinds and the evolution of modularity. American Zoologist 36:36-43.
32. Hartwell LH, Hopfield JJ, Leibler S, Murray AW. 1999. From molecular to modular cell biology. Nature 402:047-52.
33. Raff EC, Raff RA. 2000. Dissociability, modularity, evolvability. Evolution & Development 2:235-237.
34. Raff RA, Sly BJ. 2000. Modularity and dissociation in the evolution of gene expression territories in development. Evol Dev 2:102-113.
35. Schlosser G, Wagner GP. 2004. Introduction: The modularity concept in developmental and evolutionary biology. In: Schlosser G, Wagner GP, editors. Modularity in Development and Evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p 1-11.
36. Hull DL. 1976. Are species really individuals? Syst Biol 25:174-191.
37. Ghiselin MT. 1974. A radical solution to the species problem. Syst Biol 25:536-544.
38. Vrba ES, Eldredge N. 1984. Individuals, hierarchies and processes: towards a more complete evolutionary theory. Paleobiology 10:146-171.
39. Schlosser G. 2004. The role of modules in development and evolution. In: Schlosser G, Wagner GP, editors. Modularity in Development and Evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p 519-582.
40. Kirschner M, Gerhart J. 1998. Evolvability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:8420-8427.
41. de Queiroz K. 1996. Including the characters of interest during tree reconstruction and the problems of circularity and bias in studies of character evolution. Am Nat 148:700-708.
42. Pagel M. 1999. Inferring the historical patterns of biological evolution. Nature 401:877-884.
43. Oakley TH. 2003. Maximum likelihood models of character trait evolution. Comments on Theoretical Biology 8:1-17.
44. Felsenstein J. 1985. Phytogenies and the comparative method. American Naturalist 125:1-15.
45. Maddison WP. 1990. A method for testing the correlated evolution of two binary characters: Are gains or losses concentrated on certain branches of a phylogenetic tree? Evolution 44:539-557.
46. Pagel MD. 1994. Detecting correlated evolution on phytogenies: A general method for the comarative analysis of discrete characters. Proc R Soc Lond B 255:37-45.
47. Ryan MJ, Rand AS. 1995. Female responses to ancestral advertisement calls in Tungara frogs. Science 269:390-392.
48. Chang BS, Jonsson K, Kazmi MA, Donoghue MJ, Sakmar TP. 2002. Recreating a functional ancestral archosaur visual pigment. Mol Biol Evol 19:1483-1489.
49. Swofford DL, Maddison WP. 1992. Parsimony, character-state reconstructions, and evolutionary inferences. In: Mayden RL, editor. Systematics, Historical Ecology, and North American Freshwater Fishes. Stanford, California: Stanford University Press. p 186-223.
50. Schluter D, Price T, Mooers AØ, Ludwig D. 1997. Likelihood of ancestor states in adaptive radiation. Evolution 51:1699-1711.
51. Pagel M, Meade A, Barker D. 2004. Bayesian estimation of ancestral character States on phytogenies. Syst Biol 53:673-684.
52. Huelsenbeck JP, Rannala B, Masly JP. 2000. Accommodating phylogenetic uncertainty in evolutionary studies. Science 288:2349-2350.
53. Hibbett DS, Binder M. 2002. Evolution of complex fruiting-body morphologies in homobasidiomycetes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B-Biological Sciences 269:1963-1969.
54. Nosil P. 2002. Transition rates between specialization and generalization in phytophagous insects. Evolution 56:1701-1706.
55. Page RDM. 1993. Genes, organisms, and areas: the problem of multiple lineages. Syst Biol 42:77-84.
56. Page RDM, Charleston MA. 1997. From gene to organismal phytogeny: reconciled trees and the gene tree/species tree problem. Mol Phylogenet Evol 7:231-240.
57. Page RDM, Charleston MA. 1998. Trees within trees: phytogeny and historical associations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13:356-359.
58. Nordström K, Larsson TA, Larhammar D. 2004. Extensive duplications of phototransduction genes in early vertebrate evolution correlate with block (chromosome) duplications. Genomics 83:852-872.
59. Budd GE. 1999. Does evolution in body patterning genes drive morphological change -or vice versa? Bioessays 21:326-332.
60. West-Eberhard MJ. 2003. Developmental Plasticity and Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 794.
61. Meyer A, Zardoya R. 2003. Recent advances in the (molecular) phylogeny of vertebrates. Ann Rev Ecol Systematics 34:311-338.
62. Page RDM. 1993. Parasites, Phytogeny and Cospeciation. International Journal for Parasitology 23:499-506.
63. de Beer GR. 1971. Homology: an unsolved problem. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
64. Cunningham CW, Omland KO, Oakley TH. 1998. Reconstructing ancestral character states: a critical reappraisal. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13:361-366.