The vertebrate Embryo Clock: Common players dancing to a different beat

Carraco, Gil; Martins-Jesus, Ana P.; Andrade, Raquel P.

doi:10.3389/fcell.2022.944016

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 160 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…So, other evolutionary stable systems are the likely candidates to verify the connection between scales of organization. Good examples are modules built upon serially homologous structures, like phalanges 75 and vertebrae 76 . For more complex structures formed by the interaction of multiple tissues, it might be harder to devise simple models that sufficiently describe the system ontogeny and variation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using developmental rules to align microevolution with macroevolution

Machado

Mongle

Slater³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies of macroevolution have classically rejected the notion that large-scale divergence patterns can be explained through populational, microevolutionary models. For morphology, this consensus partly derives from the inability of quantitative genetics models to correctly predict the behavior of evolutionary processes at the scale of millions of years. Developmental studies (evo-devo) have been proposed to reconcile micro and macroevolution. However, there has been little progress in establishing a formal framework to apply evo-devo models of phenotypic diversification. Here, we reframe this issue by asking if using evo-devo models to quantify biological variation can improve the explanatory power of comparative models, thus helping us bridge the gap between micro- and macroevolution. We test this prediction by evaluating the evolution of primate lower molars in a comprehensive dataset densely sampled across living and extinct taxa. Our results suggest that biologically-informed morphospaces alongside quantitative genetics models allow a seamless transition between the micro and macro scales, while biologically uninformed spaces do not. We show that the adaptive landscape for primate teeth is corridor-like, with changes in morphology within the corridor being nearly neutral. Overall, our framework provides a basis for integrating evo-devo into the modern synthesis, allowing an operational way to evaluate the ultimate causes of macroevolution.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using developmental rules to align microevolution with macroevolution

Machado

Mongle

Slater³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In fact, the Hes1 gene has also been shown to cycle with a conserved 2-h periodicity in other cell types like neural progenitor cells ex vivo , fibroblasts, myoblasts, and embryonic stem cells in vitro , suggesting that a species-specific ultradian rhythm of these bHLH-transcription factors is a conserved, vital feature of vertebrate development ( Hirata et al, 2002 ; William et al, 2007 ; Ochi et al, 2020 ). This has been reviewed in detail ( Carraco et al, 2022 ).…”

Section: Bhlh-transcription Factors As the Core Regulators Of The Seg...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Species-specific roles of the Notch ligands, receptors, and targets orchestrating the signaling landscape of the segmentation clock

Ramesh,

Chu

2024

Front. Cell Dev. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Somitogenesis is a hallmark feature of all vertebrates and some invertebrate species that involves the periodic formation of block-like structures called somites. Somites are transient embryonic segments that eventually establish the entire vertebral column. A highly conserved molecular oscillator called the segmentation clock underlies this periodic event and the pace of this clock regulates the pace of somite formation. Although conserved signaling pathways govern the clock in most vertebrates, the mechanisms underlying the species-specific divergence in various clock characteristics remain elusive. For example, the segmentation clock in classical model species such as zebrafish, chick, and mouse embryos tick with a periodicity of ∼30, ∼90, and ∼120 min respectively. This enables them to form the species-specific number of vertebrae during their overall timespan of somitogenesis. Here, we perform a systematic review of the species-specific features of the segmentation clock with a keen focus on mouse embryos. We perform this review using three different perspectives: Notch-responsive clock genes, ligand-receptor dynamics, and synchronization between neighboring oscillators. We further review reports that use non-classical model organisms and in vitro model systems that complement our current understanding of the segmentation clock. Our review highlights the importance of comparative developmental biology to further our understanding of this essential developmental process.

show abstract

“…The periodicity of morphological somite formation is controlled by the somitogenesis embryo clock (EC), comprising genes with cell-autonomous oscillatory expression in the PSM driven by negative feedback loops (reviewed in [ 4 ]). Chicken hairy1 ( hes4 ), a member of the Hairy and Enhancer of split (HES) protein family of transcription factors, was the first EC gene described, oscillating in the PSM every 90 minutes, the same periodicity as somite formation [ 5 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatio-temporal dynamics of early somite segmentation in the chicken embryo

Maia-Fernandes,

Martins-Jesus,

Borralho-Martins

et al. 2024

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During vertebrate embryo development, the body is progressively segmented along the anterior-posterior (A-P) axis early in development. The rate of somite formation is controlled by the somitogenesis embryo clock (EC), which was first described as gene expression oscillations of hairy1 (hes4) in the presomitic mesoderm of chick embryos with 15–20 somites. Here, the EC displays the same periodicity as somite formation, 90 min, whereas the posterior-most somites (44–52) only arise every 150 minutes, matched by a corresponding slower pace of the EC. Evidence suggests that the rostral-most somites are formed faster, however, their periodicity and the EC expression dynamics in these early stages are unknown. In this study, we used time-lapse imaging of chicken embryos from primitive streak to somitogenesis stages with high temporal resolution (3-minute intervals). We measured the length between the anterior-most and the last formed somitic clefts in each captured frame and developed a simple algorithm to automatically infer both the length and time of formation of each somite. We found that the occipital somites (up to somite 5) form at an average rate of 75 minutes, while somites 6 onwards are formed approximately every 90 minutes. We also assessed the expression dynamics of hairy1 using half-embryo explants cultured for different periods of time. This showed that EC hairy1 expression is highly dynamic prior to somitogenesis and assumes a clear oscillatory behaviour as the first somites are formed. Importantly, using ex ovo culture and live-imaging techniques, we showed that the hairy1 expression pattern recapitulates with the formation of each new pair of somites, indicating that somite segmentation is coupled with EC oscillations since the onset of somitogenesis.

show abstract

The vertebrate Embryo Clock: Common players dancing to a different beat

Cited by 9 publications

References 160 publications

Using developmental rules to align microevolution with macroevolution

Using developmental rules to align microevolution with macroevolution

Species-specific roles of the Notch ligands, receptors, and targets orchestrating the signaling landscape of the segmentation clock

Spatio-temporal dynamics of early somite segmentation in the chicken embryo

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About