Primary chondri?cation foci in the wing basipodium of struthio camelus with comments on interpretation of autopodial elements in crocodilia and aves

Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B: Molecular and Developmental Evolution

Volumn 312, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 30-41

  Kundrát, Martin ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF CHEMISTRY   (Slovakia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALLIGATOR; ARCHAEOPTERYX; AVES; CROCODYLIDAE (ALL CROCODILES); GALLUS; STRUTHIO; STRUTHIO CAMELUS; STRUTHIONIFORMES;

ANIMAL; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CHONDROGENESIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FORELIMB; HISTOLOGY; OSTRICH; PHYSIOLOGY; PRENATAL DEVELOPMENT; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

ANIMALS; CHONDROGENESIS; HISTOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; SPECIES SPECIFICITY; STRUTHIONIFORMES; WING;

EID: 60849139024     PISSN: 15525007     EISSN: 15525015     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jez.b.21240     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Baumel JE. 1979. Nomina anatomica avium. New York: Academic Press.
2. Benton MJ, Clark J. 1988. Archosaur phylogeny and the relationship of the crocodylia. In: Benton MJ, editor. The phylogeny and classi?cation of the tetrapods. New York: Oxford University Press. p 296-338.
3. Burke AC, Alberch P. 1985. The development and homology of the chelonian carpus and tarsus. J Morphol 186:119-131.
4. Burke AC, Feduccia A. 1997. Developmental patterns and the identi?cation of homologies in the avian hand. Science 278:666-668.
5. Cuvier G. 1824. Recherches sur les ossemens fossiles V (2). Paris.
6. Dahn RD, Fallon JF. 2000. Interdigital regulation of digit identity and homeotic transformation by modulated BMP signaling. Science 289:438-441; Supplementary Material: http://www.sciencemag. org/feature/data/1049492.shl
7. Feduccia A, Nowicki J. 2002. The hand of birds revealed by early ostrich embryos. Naturwissenschaften 89:391-393.
8. Feduccia A, Martin LG, Tarsitano S. 2007. Archaeopteryx: quo vadis? Auk 124:373-380.
9. Galis F, Kundra t M, Metz JAJ. 2005. Hox genes, digit identities and the theropod/bird transition. J Exp Zool (Mol Dev Evol) 304B:198-205.
10. Gauthier JA. 1986. Saurischian monophyly and the origin of birds. Mem California Acad Sci 8:1-55.
11. Gegenbaur C. 1864. Untersuchungen zur vergleichenden anatomie der wirbelthiere i; carpus and tarsus. Leipzig: Verlag Wilhelm Englemann.
12. Hinchliffe JR. 1977. The chondrogenic pattern in chick limb morphogenesis: a problem of development and evolution. In: Ede DA, Hinchliffe JR, Balls M, editors. Vertebrate limb and somite morphogenesis. Cambridge: University Press Cambridge. p 293-309.
13. Hinchliffe JR. 1984. ''One, two, three'' or ''Two, three, four'': an embryologist's view of the homologies of the digits and carpus of modern birds. In: Hecht MK, Ostrom JH, Viohl G, Wellnhofer P, editors. The beginnings of birds. Eichstätt: Freunde des Jura-Museum. p 141-147.
14. Hinchliffe JR. 2002. Developmental basis of limb evolution. Int J Dev Biol 46:835-845.
15. Hinchliffe JR, Hecht M. 1984. Homology of the bird wing skeleton: embryological versus paleontological evidence. Evol Biol 30:21-39.
16. Hoffmann CK. 1890. Bronn's klassen und ordnungen des thier-reichs VI(3:2). Leipzig: C. F. Winteŕsche Verlagshandlung.
17. Holmgren N. 1933. On the origin of the tetrapod limb. Acta Zool (Stockholm) 14:185-295.
18. Holmgren N. 1955. Studies on the phylogeny of birds. Acta Zool (Stockholm) 36:243-328.
19. Kükenthal W. 1893. Zur entwicklung des handskelettes des krokodils. (Gegenbaur ́s) Morphol Jahrb 19:42-55.
20. Kundrát M, Seichert V. 2001. Developmental remnants of the ?rst avian metacarpus. J Morphol 248:252.
21. Kundra ́t M, Seichert V, Russell AP, Smetana Jr K. 2002. Pentadactyl pattern of the avian wing autopodium and pyramid reduction hypothesis. J Exp Zool (Mol Dev Evol) 294B:152-159.
22. Larsson HCE, Wagner GP. 2002. Pentadactyl ground state of the avian wing. J Exp Zool (Mol Dev Evol) 294B:146-151.
23. Meckel JF. 1821. System der vergleichenden anatomie, Vol. 2. Halle: Rengerschen Buchhandlung.
24. Müller GB. 1991a. Evolutionary transformation of limb pattern: heterochrony and secondary fusion. In: Hinchliffe JR, editor. Developmental patterning of the vertebrate limb. New York: Plenum Press. p 395-405.
25. Müller GB. 1991b. Developmental processes and phenotypic change in archosaur limb evolution. In: Dudley EC, editor. The unity of evolutionary biology. Washington: Dioscorides Press. p 558-560.
26. Müller GB, Alberch P. 1990. Ontogeny and the limb skeleton in Alligator mississippiensis: developmental invariance and change in the evolution of archosaur limbs. J Morphol 203:151-164.
27. Oster GF, Shubin N, Murray JD, Alberch P. 1988. Evolution and morphogenetic rules: the shape of the vertebrate limb in ontogeny and phylogeny. Evolution 42:862-884.
28. Reese AM. 1915. The alligator and its allies. New York: Putnam's Sons.
29. Rieppel O. 1993. Studies on skeleton formation in reptiles. V. Patterns of ossi?cation in the skeleton of Alligator mississippiensis DAUDIN (Reptilia, Crocodylia). Zool J Linn Soc 109:301-325.
30. Romer AS. 1955. Osteology of the reptiles. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
31. Sanz-Ezquerro JJ, Tickle CJ. 2003. Fgf signaling controls the number of phalanges and tip formation in developing digits. Curr Biol 13:1830-1836.
32. Seichert V. 1988. Signi?cance of the differential growth, relative tissue shifts, and the vascular bed in limb development. Acta Univ Carol Med Monogr 125:1-162.
33. Seichert V, Rychter Z. 1972. Vascularization of developing anterior limb of the chick embryo. II. Differentiation of vascular bed and its signi?cance for the location of morphogenetic processes inside the limb bud. Fol Morphol (Warszawa) 19:352-361.
34. Shubin NH, Alberch P. 1986. A morphogenetic approach to the origin and basic organization of the tetrapod limb. Evol Biol 20:319-387.
35. Steiner H. 1934. Ueber die embryonale hand-und fuss-skelettanlage bei den crocodiliern, sowie über ihre beziehungen zur vogel-?üelanlage und zur ursprünglichen tetrapoden-extremität. Rev Suisse Zool 41:383-396.
36. Tarsitano S, Hecht MK. 1980. A reconsideration of the reptilian relationship of Archaeopteryx. Zool J Linn Soc 69:149-182.
37. Vargas AO, Fallon JF. 2005. Birds have dinosaur wings: the molecular evidence. J Exp Zool (Mol Dev Evol) 304B:86-90.
38. Wagner GP, Gauthier JA. 1999. 1,2,3 : 2,3,4: a solution to the problem of the homology of the digits in the avian hand. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 96:5111-5116.
39. Wassersug RJ. 1976. A procedure for differential staining of cartilage and bone in whole formalin-?xed vertebrates. Stain Technol 51:131-134.
40. Welten MCM, Verbeek FJ, Meijer AH, Richardson MK. 2005. Gene expression and digit homology in the chicken embryo wing. Evol Dev 7:18-28.
41. Wiedersheim R. 1886. Vergleichende Anatomie der Wirbeltiere. Jena.
42. Zou H,Niswander L. 1996. Requirement for BMP signaling in interdigital apoptosis and scale formation. Science 272:738-741.