4.8 Article

The developmental impacts of natural selection on human pelvic morphology

Journal

SCIENCE ADVANCES
Volume 8, Issue 33, Pages -

Publisher

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abq4884

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Harvard University
  2. National Science Foundation [BCS1518596, BCS1847979]
  3. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, researchers used functional genomics to investigate the developmental genetic mechanisms of human pelvic shape and identified a key gestational window when human-specific morphology becomes recognizable. They found evidence of ancient selection and genetic constraint on regulatory sequences involved in ilium expansion and growth, and showed that variation in iliac traits is reduced in humans compared to African apes.
Evolutionary responses to selection for bipedalism and childbirth have shaped the human pelvis, a structure that differs substantially from that in apes. Morphology related to these factors is present by birth, yet the developmental-genetic mechanisms governing pelvic shape remain largely unknown. Here, we pinpoint and characterize a key gestational window when human-specific pelvic morphology becomes recognizable, as the ilium and the entire pelvis acquire traits essential for human walking and birth. We next use functional genomics to molecularly characterize chondrocytes from different pelvic subelements during this window to reveal their developmental-genetic architectures. We then find notable evidence of ancient selection and genetic constraint on regulatory sequences involved in ilium expansion and growth, findings complemented by our phenotypic analyses showing that variation in iliac traits is reduced in humans compared to African apes. Our datasets provide important resources for musculoskeletal biology and begin to elucidate developmental mechanisms that shape human-specific morphology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available