Walking on insect paths? Early ommatidial development in the compound eye of the ancestral crustacean, Triops cancriformis

Melzer, Roland R.; Michalke, Clemens; Smola, Ulrich

doi:10.1007/s001140050727

Cited by 50 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has long been known that many aspects of the eye design are virtually identical between Hexapoda and Crustacea: the ommatidia of both groups have a small, strictly determined and individually identifiable set of cells (e.g., Melzer et al, 1997;Paulus, 2000;Bitsch and Bitsch, 2005). Furthermore, many similarities exist during eye formation in these two groups (Melzer et al, 2000;Hafner and Tokarski, 2001). However, eye design in Myriapoda (millipedes and centipedes) is markedly different to that of Tetraconata.…”

Section: Comparison To Eye Growth In Drosophila Melanogaster and Evolmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, in recent years, aspects of eye development emerge as important characters for phylogenetic analyses and, therefore, are examined in a variety of arthropods, including Crustacea (Harzsch et al, 1999;Melzer et al, 2000;Hafner and Tokarski, 2001;Harzsch and Walossek, 2001;Wildt and Harzsch, 2002), Hexapoda (Friedrich et al, 1996;Friedrich and Benzer, 2000;Friedrich, 2003), and Myriapoda . Comparative studies on eye development in insects have also revealed new insights into the molecular developmental changes that occurred during the evolutionary transition from hemimetabolous to holometabolous insects (Friedrich, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evolution of arthropod visual systems: Development of the eyes and central visual pathways in the horseshoe crabLimulus polyphemusLinnaeus, 1758 (Chelicerata, Xiphosura)

Harzsch

Vilpoux

Blackburn

et al. 2006

Developmental Dynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite ongoing interest into the architecture, biochemistry, and physiology of the visual systems of the xiphosuran Limulus polyphemus, their ontogenetic aspects have received little attention. Thus, we explored the development of the lateral eyes and associated neuropils in late embryos and larvae of these animals. The first external evidence of the lateral eyes was the appearance of white pigment spots-guanophores associated with the rudimentary photoreceptors-on the dorsolateral side of the late embryos, suggesting that these embryos can perceive light. The first brown pigment emerges in the eyes during the last (third) embryonic molt to the trilobite stage. However, ommatidia develop from this field of pigment toward the end of the larval trilobite stage so that the young larvae at hatching do not have object recognition. Double staining with the proliferation marker bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU) and an antibody against L. polyphemus myosin III, which is concentrated in photoreceptors of this species, confirmed previous reports that, in the trilobite larvae, new cellular material is added to the eye field from an anteriorly located proliferation zone. Pulse-chase experiments indicated that these new cells differentiate into new ommatidia. Examining larval eyes labeled for opsin showed that the new ommatidia become organized into irregular rows that give the eye field a triangular appearance. Within the eye field, the ommatidia are arranged in an imperfect hexagonal array. Myosin III immunoreactivity in trilobite larvae also revealed the architecture of the central visual pathways associated with the median eye complex and the lateral eyes. Double labeling with myosin III and BrdU showed that neurogenesis persists in the larval brain and suggested that new neurons of both the lamina and the medulla originate from a single common proliferation zone. These data are compared with eye development in Drosophila melanogaster and are discussed with regard to new ideas on eye evolution in the Euarthropoda. Developmental Dynamics 235:2641-2655, 2006.

show abstract

Section: Comparison To Eye Growth In Drosophila Melanogaster and Evolmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of arthropod visual systems: Development of the eyes and central visual pathways in the horseshoe crabLimulus polyphemusLinnaeus, 1758 (Chelicerata, Xiphosura)

Harzsch

Vilpoux

Blackburn

et al. 2006

Developmental Dynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Neuromorphological analyses have led to the recognition that ommatidial development (Melzer et al 2000) and brain anatomy (Strausfeld 1998(Strausfeld , 2005 unite the insects and crustaceans and that arrangements of cerebral neuropils show the Remipedia to be phylogenetically closer to the malacostracans and hexapods than to basal crustaceans (Fanenbruck & Harzsch 2005). In the early 1900s, it was already recognized that the organization of the arthropod visual system and central brain was so highly conserved within different arthropod groups that these features could be used to suggest phylogenetic associations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arthropod phylogeny: onychophoran brain organization suggests an archaic relationship with a chelicerate stem lineage

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neuroanatomical studies have demonstrated that the architecture and organization among neuropils are highly conserved within any order of arthropods. The shapes of nerve cells and their neuropilar arrangements provide robust characters for phylogenetic analyses. Such analyses so far have agreed with molecular phylogenies in demonstrating that entomostracansCmalacostracans belong to a clade (Tetraconata) that includes the hexapods. However, relationships among what are considered to be paraphyletic groups or among the stem arthropods have not yet been satisfactorily resolved. The present parsimony analyses of independent neuroarchitectural characters from 27 arthropods and lobopods demonstrate relationships that are congruent with phylogenies derived from molecular studies, except for the status of the Onychophora. The present account describes the brain of the onychophoran Euperipatoides rowelli, demonstrating that the structure and arrangements of its neurons, cerebral neuropils and sensory centres are distinct from arrangements in the brains of mandibulates. Neuroanatomical evidence suggests that the organization of the onychophoran brain is similar to that of the brains of chelicerates.

show abstract

“…Further accessory cell types including the pair of primary pigment or corneageneous cells (1′) join during terminal differentiation of the ommatidium. Labeled ommatidial cluster stages, as well as the labeled components of the differentiated ommatidium, are conserved between insects and crustaceans as demonstrated by studies in Drosophila and the tadpole shrimp Triops cancriformis (Crustacea, Notostraca) (Melzer et al 2000) between insects and malocostracean optic lobes is the presence of a separated inner medulla in insects. Other differences between the neuropils of crustacean and insects include details in the layering of the medulla.…”

Section: Ancient Heritagementioning

confidence: 91%

“…4). Remarkably, the differentiating retina of crayfish (Crustacea, Malacostraca) and tadpole shrimps (Crustacea, Anacostraca) share many of the ommatidial patterning stages (Melzer et al 2000;Hafner and Tokarski 1998). This implies that the retinal patterning of the ancestor to insects and crustaceans has remained conserved for more than 500 million years (Walossek and Muller 1990).…”

Section: Ancient Heritagementioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of Insect Eyes: Tales of Ancient Heritage, Deconstruction, Reconstruction, Remodeling, and Recycling

Buschbeck

Friedrich

2008

Evo Edu Outreach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The visual organs of insects are known for their impressive evolutionary conservation. Compound eyes built from ommatidia with four cone cells are now accepted to date back to the last common ancestor of insects and crustaceans. In species as different as fruit flies and tadpole shrimps, the stepwise cellular patterning steps of the early compound eye exhibit detailed similarities implying 500 million years of developmental conservation. Strikingly, there is also a cryptic diversity of insect visual organs, which gives proof to evolution's versatility in molding even the most tenacious structures into something new. We explore this fascinating aspect in regard to the structure and function of a variety of different insect eyes. This includes work on the unique compound-single-chamber combination eye of twistedwinged insects and the bizarre evolutionary trajectories of specialized larval eyes in endopterygote insects.

show abstract

Walking on insect paths? Early ommatidial development in the compound eye of the ancestral crustacean, Triops cancriformis

Cited by 50 publications

References 15 publications

Evolution of arthropod visual systems: Development of the eyes and central visual pathways in the horseshoe crabLimulus polyphemusLinnaeus, 1758 (Chelicerata, Xiphosura)

Evolution of arthropod visual systems: Development of the eyes and central visual pathways in the horseshoe crabLimulus polyphemusLinnaeus, 1758 (Chelicerata, Xiphosura)

Arthropod phylogeny: onychophoran brain organization suggests an archaic relationship with a chelicerate stem lineage

Evolution of Insect Eyes: Tales of Ancient Heritage, Deconstruction, Reconstruction, Remodeling, and Recycling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About