Genetic analysis of the dorsal light reaction in epigean and cave-dwelling<i>Astyanax fasciatus</i>(Teleostei Characidae)

Langecker, Thomas G.

doi:10.1080/08927014.1993.9523023

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, in Astyanax cave fish the visually triggered aggressive behaviour as well as the dorsal light reaction, which are no longer performed when surface fish are kept in darkness, and hence can not be subjected to selection because of energy economy, get reduced in the cave fish, nonetheless (Hofmann and Hausberg, 1993;Langecker, 1993;Hausberg, 1995).…”

Section: Mechanisms Of Regression Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A. mexicanus Filippi), which has developed a series of cave living populations within a restricted area in Northeastern Mexico, has become a model species in evolutionary research (Mitchell et al, 1977;Jeffery, 2001;Wilkens, 1988Wilkens, , 2004. The cave forms are characterised by the regressive evolution of all traits of which biological function is dependant on the presence of light; such as the eyes (Wilkens, 1988), the number of melanophores (Wilkens, 1988), the melanin pigmentation (Sadoǧ lu, 1955(Sadoǧ lu, , 1957Sadoǧ lu and McKee, 1969), the dorsal light reaction (Langecker, 1993) and the visually triggered aggressive behaviour (Hofmann and Hausberg, 1993). Traits that were constructively improved as adaptations to cave life include the number of taste buds (Schemmel, 1974), the angle of feeding on the ground (Schemmel, 1980), the ability of fat storage (Hueppop, 1989), the egg size (Hueppop and Wilkens, 1991), the number of free neuromasts of the lateral line sense (Wilkens unpublished), and aggressive behaviour as triggered by the lateral line sense (Hofmann and Hausberg, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genes, modules and the evolution of cave fish

Wilkens

2010

Heredity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cave fish provide a model system for exploring the genetic basis of regressive evolution. A proposal that regressive evolution (for example, eye loss) may result from pleiotropy, by selection on constructive traits (for example, improved taste) has received considerable recent interest as it contradicts the theory that regressive evolution results from neutral evolution. In this study, these theories are reviewed by placing the classical and molecular genetic studies of cave fish in a common framework. Sequence data and the wide range of intermediate sized eyes in hybrids between surface and cave fish suggest that currently there is no strong evidence supporting the notion that structural eye genes have been afflicted by destructive mutations. The hedgehog genes, which are suggested to reduce the primordial eye cup size in cavefish by expanded expression, are also not mutated. The as yet unidentified 'eye genes' revealed by crossing experiments seem primarily responsible for eye regression and determine eye development through hedgehog. Hybrids between different eye-reduced cave populations developing large 'back to surface eyes' support this. In such eyes, hh expression is restored by complementary restitution because of the recombination of 'eye genes', which were subjected to different destructive mutations in separately evolving cave fish populations. All regressive and constructive cave fish traits can be considered to result from genetic modules, each showing a comparable pattern of expression. The constructive and regressive modules are shown to inherit independently from each other, which does not support the view that eye regression is a spin off effect of the improvement of beneficial traits through pleiotropy.

show abstract

Section: Mechanisms Of Regression Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genes, modules and the evolution of cave fish

Wilkens

2010

Heredity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The latter traits can no longer be performed in the cave fish, because their genetic basis is deteriorated (Langecker, 1993;Kowalko et al, 2013a, b). As is suggested, neuromodulatory systems provide sites at which natural selection can act and it can be assumed that behavioural traits like feeding posture and sleep have been altered as constructive adaptations to cave life under the influence of selection.…”

Section: Nature Of Genes Responsible For Complex Traitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This was shown for constructive traits like number of taste organs (Schemmel, 1974a, b;Protas et al, 2007), feeding posture (Schemmel, 1980;Kowalko et al, 2013b) and neuromasts (Yoshizawa et al, 2012;Wilkens, unpub. ) as well as sleep duration (Duboue, Keene & Borowsky, 2011), amount of yolk content (Hueppop & Wilkens, 1991) or improved ability to store fat (Hueppop, 1989) and in regressive traits like eye size, melanophore number (Lande, 1981;Wilkens, 1988Wilkens, , 2010Protas et al, 2007), schooling (Kowalko et al, 2013a), or inclination of dorsal light reaction (Langecker, 1993). As an exception among the complex traits studied, the degree of dark preference was found to be based on one single QTL (Kowalko et al, 2013a).…”

Section: Polygenic Traitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in contrast, in addition to the mutations in neuromodulatory systems or probably even without them, random regressive mutations were shown to accumulate in the unique and intrinsic set of developmental patterning mechanisms of traits like schooling and optically released behaviours like aggressive or dorsal light reactions. The latter traits can no longer be performed in the cave fish, because their genetic basis is deteriorated (Langecker, 1993;Kowalko et al, 2013a, b). Thus regressive mutations in the neuromodulatory systems would only be part.…”

Section: Nature Of Genes Responsible For Complex Traitsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Genetics and hybridization in surface and caveAstyanax(Teleostei): a comparison of regressive and constructive traits

Wilkens

2016

Biol. J. Linn. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Change in ecological conditions, as seen in surface and cave populations of Astyanax (Teleostei), has caused the divergent evolution of a large number of traits like eyes, coloration, taste, lateral line, and different kinds of behaviour like schooling, sleep or feeding posture. Because of the interfertility of surface and cave forms these fish are an exceptional object to study the morphological and genetic basis of the evolution of such complex regressive and constructive traits. Classical crossing analyses and genomic studies are contributing to growing understanding. Both kinds of traits mostly rely on multiple genetic bases and the phenotypic manifestation in the various crosses is similar. The gene effect underlying the phenotypic manifestation may exhibit an exponential increase at differing amounts in the various traits and crosses. Missing or presence of such genetic interaction helps determine whether the variability of eyes or pigmentation exhibited by Astyanax cave fish populations like Micos, is due to a more recent origin or to secondary hybridization with the surface fish. Neither crossing analysis nor QTL mapping revealed that eye reduction is pleiotropically antagonistically related to the increase of taste buds or lateral line sense. Independent inheritance of traits suggests that Astyanax cave fish are subjected to mosaic evolution.

show abstract

Evolution and development in cave animals: from fish to crustaceans

Protas

Jeffery

2012

WIREs Developmental Biology

140

109

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cave animals are excellent models to study the general principles of evolution as well as the mechanisms of adaptation to a novel environment: the perpetual darkness of caves. In this article, two of the major model systems used to study the evolution and development (evo–devo) of cave animals are described: the teleost fish Astyanax mexicanus and the isopod crustacean Asellus aquaticus. The ways in which these animals match the major attributes expected of an evo–devo cave animal model system are described. For both species, we enumerate the regressive and constructive troglomorphic traits that have evolved during their adaptation to cave life, the developmental and genetic basis of these traits, the possible evolutionary forces responsible for them, and potential new areas in which these model systems could be used for further exploration of the evolution of cave animals. Furthermore, we compare the two model cave animals to investigate the mechanisms of troglomorphic evolution. Finally, we propose a few other cave animal systems that would be suitable for development as additional models to obtain a more comprehensive understanding of the developmental and genetic mechanisms involved in troglomorphic evolution.

show abstract

Genetic analysis of the dorsal light reaction in epigean and cave-dwellingAstyanax fasciatus(Teleostei Characidae)

Cited by 6 publications

References 12 publications

Genes, modules and the evolution of cave fish

Genes, modules and the evolution of cave fish

Genetics and hybridization in surface and caveAstyanax(Teleostei): a comparison of regressive and constructive traits

Evolution and development in cave animals: from fish to crustaceans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About