4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Integrating Evo and Devo: The Limb as Model Structure

期刊

INTEGRATIVE AND COMPARATIVE BIOLOGY
卷 57, 期 6, 页码 1293-1302

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/icb/icx115

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Alberta Ingenuity [200300516]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Reconciling the origins of morphological diversity with the deep homology of underlying mechanisms is a question fundamental to the goals of evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo or EDB). In this paper I argue that differing research agendas in evolutionary and developmental biology have hindered how we address this question, but that the limb provides ideal common ground for their fuller integration. To support this idea, I review two previous analyses of limb variation in mammal, bird, and reptile taxa that offer complementary approaches to explaining diversity. Specifically, I present evidence suggesting that: (1) a shared genetic architecture affects the pattern of between limb developmental integration, while their functional dissociation is linked to both increased phenotypic evolvability and diversity of interlimb proportions, and (2) within limb proportional diversity is biased such that proximal and distal segments function as tradeoffs while the middle segment is more conservative, a signal that is both evident from early in morphogenesis and suggestive of an inhibitory cascade model of limb proximo-distal axis development. In the first case, shared genetic mechanisms predict both observed developmental integration between limbs and patterns of clade-specific diversity. In the second case, underappreciated patterns of phenotypic diversity suggest novel insights into the underlying developmental mechanisms by which variation is generated. These studies show how insights from both evolutionary and developmental biology of the limb may be used to generate novel testable hypotheses into the origins of diversity that are broadly applicable to the integration of EDB.

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

4.4
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