Mammalian neural crest and neural crest derivatives

Morriss‐Kay, Gillian M.; Ruberte, Esther; Fukiishi, Yonetaka

doi:10.1016/s0940-9602(11)80209-8

Cited by 43 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…(In this review, I use the term "first arch crest" to refer to crest that arises anterior to the third rhombomere and, thus, to crest that will enter the frontonasal region as well as the first arch proper.) Post-otic crest begins to emerge at the six-to eightsomite stage, when the neural folds first begin contact, and the second arch crest appears at the eight-to nine-somite stage (Nichols, 1981(Nichols, , 1987Morriss Kay, 1985, 1986;Morriss-Kay et al, 1993;Osumi-Yamashita et al, 1994Serbedzija et al, 1992).…”

Section: Differentiation and Migration Of Cranial Neural Crestmentioning

confidence: 99%

Craniofacial development in marsupial mammals: Developmental origins of evolutionary change

Smith

2006

Developmental Dynamics

102

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biologists have long studied the evolutionary consequences of the differences in reproductive and life history strategies of marsupial and eutherian mammals. Over the past few decades, the impact of these strategies on the development of the marsupial embryo and neonate has received attention. In this review, the differences in development in the craniofacial region in marsupial and eutherian mammals will be discussed. The review will highlight differences at the organogenic and cellular levels, and discuss hypotheses for shifts in the expression of important regulatory genes. The major difference in the organogenic period is a whole-scale shift in the relative timing of central nervous system structures, in particular those of the forebrain, which are delayed in marsupials, relative to the structures of the oral-facial apparatus. Correlated with the delay in development of nervous system structures, the ossification of the bones of the neurocranium are delayed, while those of the face are accelerated. This study will also review work showing that the neural crest, which provides much of the cellular material to the facial skeleton and may also carry important patterning information, is notably accelerated in its development in marsupials. Potential consequences of these observations for hypotheses on constraint, evolutionary integration, and the existence of developmental modules is discussed. Finally, the implications of these results for hypotheses on the genetic modulation of craniofacial patterning are presented.

show abstract

Section: Differentiation and Migration Of Cranial Neural Crestmentioning

confidence: 99%

Craniofacial development in marsupial mammals: Developmental origins of evolutionary change

Smith

2006

Developmental Dynamics

102

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The studies of mammals thus far have indicated essential similarity with other vertebrates, although a few important differences exist (see, for example, Nichols, 1981Nichols, , 1986Nichols, , 1987Morriss-Kay, 1985, 1986;Serbedzija et al, 1992;Morriss-Kay et al, 1993;Trainor and Tam, 1995;Peterson et al, 1996). One difference is that in most vertebrates migration is typically after neural tube closure, with a distinct rostral-caudal gradient in the timing of migration (e.g., Hall, 1999b).…”

Section: Heterochronies In Early Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequence Heterochrony and the Evolution of Development

Smith

2002

Journal of Morphology

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the most persistent questions in comparative developmental biology concerns whether there are general rules by which ontogeny and phylogeny are related. Answering this question requires conceptual and analytic approaches that allow biologists to examine a wide range of developmental events in well-structured phylogenetic contexts. For evolutionary biologists, one of the most dominant approaches to comparative developmental biology has centered around the concept of heterochrony. However, in recent years the focus of studies of heterochrony largely has been limited to one aspect, changes in size and shape. I argue that this focus has restricted the kinds of questions that have been asked about the patterns of developmental change in phylogeny, which has narrowed our ability to address some of the most fundamental questions about development and evolution. Here I contrast the approaches of growth heterochrony with a broader view of heterochrony that concentrates on changes in developmental sequence. I discuss a general approach to sequence heterochrony and summarize newly emerging methods to analyze a variety of kinds of developmental change in explicit phylogenetic contexts. Finally, I summarize a series of studies on the evolution of development in mammals that use these new approaches.

show abstract

“…Pathways of migration of cranial neural crest cells into developing facial primordia have been elucidated with techniques such as grafting labelled tissue (Johnson 1966;Noden 1975) and more recently DiI labelling (Lumsden et al, 1991;Morris-Kay et al, 1993). These studies have shown, for example, that the mesencephalic (midbrain) neural crest commences migration first, followed by posterior diencephalon (forebrain) crest, and that both migrate ventrally, from the neural folds, beneath the head ectoderm (Noden, 1975).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%