Canalization and developmental stability refer to the tendency of developmental processes to follow particular trajectories, despite external or internal perturbation. Canalization is the tendency for development of a specific genotype to follow the same trajectory under different conditions (different environments or different genetic backgrounds), while developmental stability is the tendency for the development of a specific genotype to follow the same trajectory under the same conditions. Morphological integration refers to the tendency for structures to show correlated variation because they develop in response to shared developmental processes or function in concert with other structures. All three phenomena are emergent properties of developmental systems that can affect the interaction of development and evolution. In this paper, we review the topics of canalization, developmental stability, and morphological integration and their relevance to primate and human evolution. We then test three developmentally motivated hypotheses about the patterning of variability components in the mammalian limb. We find that environmental variances and fluctuating asymmetries (FA) increase distally along the limb in adult macaques but not in fetal mice. We infer that the greater variability of more distal segments in macaques is due to postnatal mechanical effects. We also find that heritability and FA are significantly correlated when different limb measurements are compared in fetal mice. This supports the idea that the mechanisms underlying canalization and developmental stability are related. Finally, we report that the covariation structure of fore-and hindlimb skeletal elements shows evidence for morphological integration between serially homologous structures between the limbs. This is evidence for the existence of developmental modules that link structures between the limbs. Such modules would produce covariation that would need to be overcome by selection for divergence in hind-and forelimb morphology. Yrbk Phys Anthropol 45: 131-158, 2002.

Evolutionary developmental biology of primates will be driven largely by the developmental biology of the house mouse. Inferences from how known developmental perturbations produce phenotypic effects in model organisms, such as mice, to how the same perturbations would affect craniofacial form in primates must be informed by comparisons of phenotypic variation and variability in mice and the primate species of interest. We use morphometric methods to compare patterns of cranial variability in homologous datasets obtained for two strains of laboratory mice and rhesus macaques. C57BL/6J represents a common genetic background for transgenic models. A/WySnJ mice exhibit altered facial morphology which results from reduction in the growth of the maxillary process during formation of the face. This is relevant to evolutionary changes in facial prognathism in nonhuman primate and human evolution. Rhesus macaques represent a nonhuman primate about which a great deal of phenotypic and genetic information is available. We find significant similarities in covariation patterns between the C57BL/6J mice and macaques. Among-trait variation in genetic and phenotypic variances are fairly concordant among the three groups, but among-trait variation in developmental stability is not. Finally, analysis of modularity based on phenotypic and genetic correlations did not reveal a consistent pattern in the three groups. We discuss the implications of these results for the study of evolutionary developmental biology of primates and outline a research strategy for integrating mouse genomics and developmental biology into this emerging field.

Variability contrasts with variation in that variability describes the potential for variation, not simply the expressed variation. The power of studying variability lies in creating a conceptual framework around which the relationship between the genotype and phenotype can be understood. Here, we attempt to demonstrate the importance of phenotypic variability, how it structures variation, and how fundamental developmental processes structure variability. Given the broad scope of this topic, we focus on three widely studied properties of variability: canalization, developmental stability and morphological integration. We have organized the paper to emphasize the importance of differentiating between the theory surrounding these components of phenotypic variability, their measurement and the biological factors surrounding their expression. First, we define these properties of variability, how they relate to each other and to variability as a whole. Second, we summarize the common methods of measurement for canalization, developmental stability and morphological integration and the reasoning behind these methods. Finally, we focus on jaw development as an example of how the basic processes of development affect variability and the resultant variation, with emphasis on how processes at all levels of the organismal hierarchy interact with one another and contribute to phenotypic variability.

The mammalian skull performs a variety of functions and its growth and development mirrors this complexity. Cranial growth and development have been actively studied for many years. Despite this interest, the variation in the patterns and processes of skull growth has attracted little attention. An important and unanswered question is the extent to which patterns of cranial covariation and variation are dynamically reworked throughout postnatal growth. To address this question, we examine patterns of variability in random-bred mouse skulls aged 35, 90, and 150 days. Using a battery of both Procrustes coordinate and Euclidean distance-based methods, we measure mean shape, canalization, developmental stability, and morphological integration in these skulls. We predict that the patterns of variability are dynamic, particularly between the youngest and the two oldest age groups due to the influence of functional effects such as postweaning mastication. We also hypothesize that patterns of variability are structured by the same functional and developmental factors that have been shown to influence cranial growth in primates. Our results indicate that contrary to our predictions, patterns of canalization, developmental stability, and morphological integration are stabilized before 35 days. The mean shape, however, changed significantly with growth. We found that only the facial region showed significant integration as predicted by the functional matrix model used in other studies of integration. These results indicate that phenotypic integration in these mice does not closely match those found for primate species, suggesting that comparisons between species should be made with care.