4.3 Review

Put a tiger in your tank: the polyclad flatworm Maritigrella crozieri as a proposed model for evo-devo

期刊

EVODEVO
卷 4, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/2041-9139-4-29

关键词

Evolutionary and developmental biology; Larvae; Neuropeptides; Planarians; Polyclad flatworms; Regeneration; Spiralians; Stem cells; Transcriptome; Turbellarians

资金

  1. Leverhulme Trust [F/07 134/DA]
  2. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/H006966/1]
  3. Austrian Ministry of Science and Research [SPA/02-81]
  4. Royal Society
  5. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/H006966/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. BBSRC [BB/H006966/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polyclad flatworms are an early branching clade within the rhabditophoran Platyhelminthes. They provide an interesting system with which to explore the evolution of development within Platyhelminthes and amongst Spiralia (Lophotrochozoa). Unlike most other flatworms, polyclads undergo spiral cleavage (similar to that seen in some other spiralian taxa), they are the only free-living flatworms where development via a larval stage occurs, and they are the only flatworms in which embryos can be reared outside of their protective egg case, enabling embryonic manipulations. Past work has focused on comparing early cleavage patterns and larval anatomy between polyclads and other spiralians. We have selected Maritigrella crozieri, the tiger flatworm, as a suitable polyclad species for developmental studies, because it is abundant and large in size compared to other species. These characteristics have facilitated the generation of a transcriptome from embryonic and larval material and are enabling us to develop methods for gene expression analysis and immunofluorescence techniques. Here we give an overview of M. crozieri and its development, we highlight the advantages and current limitations of this animal as a potential evo-devo model and discuss current lines of research.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据