Skeletogenesis of <i>Myiopsitta monachus</i> (Psittaciformes) and sequence heterochronies in Aves

Carril, Julieta; Tambussi, Claudia Patricia

doi:10.1111/ede.12211

Cited by 17 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Comparative studies of ontogenetic sequence and timing can be a powerful approach in inferring the developmentalgenetic processes that underlie the evolution of adaptive traits. Comparisons of osteogenic sequence and heterochronies among vertebrate taxa have found differences related to important life history traits, and that may underlie evolutionarily divergent aspects of adult skeletal morphology (Weisbecker, Goswami, Wroe, & Sanchez-Villagra, 2008;Wilson et al, 2010;Koyabu et al, 2011;Carril & Tambussi, 2017). Relatively few studies have leveraged a potential point of entry into the mechanisms of vertebrate morphological evolution: variation of the developmental timing within a species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developmental timing differences underlie armor loss across threespine stickleback populations

Currey

Bassham

Perry

et al. 2017

Evolution and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparing ontogenetic patterns within a well-described evolutionary context aids in inferring mechanisms of change, including heterochronies or deletion of developmental pathways. Because selection acts on phenotypes throughout ontogeny, any within-taxon developmental variation has implications for evolvability. We compare ontogenetic order and timing of locomotion and defensive traits in three populations of threespine stickleback that have evolutionarily divergent adult forms. This analysis adds to the growing understanding of developmental genetic mechanisms of adaptive change in this evolutionary model species by delineating when chondrogenesis and osteogenesis in two derived populations begin to deviate from the developmental pattern in their immediate ancestors. We found that differences in adult defensive morphologies arise through abolished or delayed initiation of these traits rather than via an overall heterochronic shift, that intra-population ontogenetic variation is increased for some derived traits, and that altered armor developmental timing differentiates the derived populations from each other despite parallels in adult lateral plate armor phenotypes. We found that changes in ossified elements of the pelvic armor are linked to delayed and incomplete development of an early-forming pelvic cartilage, and that this disruption likely presages the variable pelvic vestiges documented in many derived populations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developmental timing differences underlie armor loss across threespine stickleback populations

Currey

Bassham

Perry

et al. 2017

Evolution and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Precocial birds hatch with their eyes open while altricial birds hatch with their eyes closed. Previous research has shown that skeletal development is delayed in altricial compared to precocial birds . Given that functionally important bones should ossify first, we hypothesized that if the ocular skeletal system is functionally important for vision (as proposed by Walls) then it should develop earlier in precocial species (such as the chicken) compared to in more altricial species (such as the barn owl).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

A heterochronic shift in skeletal development in the barn owl (Tyto furcata): A description of the ocular skeleton and tubular eye shape formation

Franz‐Odendaal

Krings

2019

Developmental Dynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The eyes of some birds of prey (Strigiformes and some eagles) are tubular in shape, which contrasts strongly with those in others, which are more globose (e.g., Galliformes) or flat (most diurnal birds). Regardless, all birds have an ocular skeleton composed of a ring of ossicles (annulus ossicularis sclerae) and a cartilage cup within the sclera. Results We show that the tubular eye of the barn owl, Tyto furcata, grows substantially in length to achieve its long axial length several weeks after hatching, well after the period when the visual input adjusts the optical system and when the scleral ossicles mineralize. This is in contrast to the chicken. The conjunctival papillae are morphologically different in each species, however, they are present for about 3 days in both birds before they degenerate. Conclusions Our data shows a heterochronic shift in the timing of scleral cartilage development and ossicle mineralization (but not induction) to later in development compared to in the chicken. These shifts likely relate to the altricial vs precocial nature of these birds and suggests that the scleral ossicles are likely functionally important bones for vision in owls and possibly other altricial species.

show abstract

“…and different modes of developmental change may actually be more frequent. In contrast, sequence heterochronies are well-documented (e.g., Bininda-Emonds, Jeffery, & Richardson, 2003;Bininda-Emonds, Jeffery, Coates, & Richardson, 2002;Carril & Tambussi, 2017;Ito, Matsumoto, & Hirata, 2019;Koyabu et al, 2014;K. Local heterochrony is often manifest postembryonically and so can often be detected paleontologically (see examples in Jablonski, 2017a;Urdy, Wilson, Haug, & Sánchez-Villagra, 2013), and some have occurred repeatedly.…”

Section: Observations On Extant and Fossil Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Local heterochrony is often manifest postembryonically and so can often be detected paleontologically (see examples in Jablonski, 2017a;Urdy, Wilson, Haug, & Sánchez-Villagra, 2013), and some have occurred repeatedly. For example, evolutionary changes in ossification sequences may have limited or promoted access to particular regions of morphospace in marsupials versus eutherians (Weisbecker, Goswami, Wroe, & Sánchez-Villagra, 2008) or in parrots versus passerines (Carril & Tambussi, 2017). In contrast, sequence heterochronies are well-documented (e.g., Bininda-Emonds, Jeffery, & Richardson, 2003;Bininda-Emonds, Jeffery, Coates, & Richardson, 2002;Carril & Tambussi, 2017;Ito, Matsumoto, & Hirata, 2019;Koyabu et al, 2014;K.…”

Section: Observations On Extant and Fossil Populationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developmental bias, macroevolution, and the fossil record

Jablonski

2019

Evolution and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A fuller understanding of the role of developmental bias in shaping large-scale evolutionary patterns requires integrating bias (the probability distribution of variation accessible to an ancestral phenotype) with clade dynamics (the differential survival and production of species and evolutionary lineages). This synthesis could proceed as a two-way exchange between the developmental data available to neontologists and the strictly phenotypic but richly historical and dynamic data available to paleontologists. Analyses starting in extant populations could aim to predict macroevolution in the fossil record from observed developmental bias, while analyses starting in the fossil record, particularly the record of extant species and lineages, could aim to predict developmental bias from macroevolutionary patterns, including the broad range of extinct phenotypes. Analyses in multivariate morphospaces are especially effective when coupled with phylogeny, theoretical and developmental models, and diversity-disparity plots. This research program will also require assessing the "heritability" of an ancestral bias across phylogeny, and the tendency for bias change in strength and orientation over evolutionary time. Such analyses will help find a set of general rules for the macroevolutionary effects of developmental bias, including its impact on and interactions with the other intrinsic and extrinsic factors governing the movement, expansion, and contraction of clades in morphospace.

show abstract

Skeletogenesis of Myiopsitta monachus (Psittaciformes) and sequence heterochronies in Aves

Cited by 17 publications

References 54 publications

Developmental timing differences underlie armor loss across threespine stickleback populations

Developmental timing differences underlie armor loss across threespine stickleback populations

A heterochronic shift in skeletal development in the barn owl (Tyto furcata): A description of the ocular skeleton and tubular eye shape formation

Developmental bias, macroevolution, and the fossil record

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About