Diminution of pharyngeal segmentation and the evolution of the amniotes.

Amniote evolution DLX Larynx Pharyngeal arch Pharyngeal pouch Pharyngeal segmentation

Journal

Zoological letters
ISSN: 2056-306X
Titre abrégé: Zoological Lett
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101664800

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2019
Historique:
received: 23 11 2018
accepted: 05 02 2019
entrez: 22 2 2019
pubmed: 23 2 2019
medline: 23 2 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The pharyngeal arches are a series of bulges found on the lateral surface of the head of vertebrate embryos, and it is within these segments that components of the later anatomy are laid down. In most vertebrates, the post-otic pharyngeal arches will form the branchial apparatus, while in amniotes these segments are believed to generate the larynx. It has been unclear how the development of these segments has been altered with the emergence of the amniotes. In this study, we examined the development of pharyngeal arches in amniotes and show that the post-otic pharyngeal arches in this clade are greatly diminished. We find that the post-otic segments do not undergo myogenesis or skeletogenesis, but are remodelled before these processes occur. We also find that nested DLX expression, which is a feature of all the pharyngeal arches in anamniotes, is associated with the anterior segments but less so with the posterior arches in amniotes. We further show that the posterior arches of the mouse embryo fail to properly delineate, which demonstrates the lack of function of these posterior segments in later development. In amniotes, there has been a loss of the ancestral "branchial" developmental programme that is a general feature of gnathostomes; myogenesis and skeletogenesis This is likely to have facilitated the emergence of the larynx as a new structure not constrained by the segmental organisation of the posterior pharyngeal region.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
The pharyngeal arches are a series of bulges found on the lateral surface of the head of vertebrate embryos, and it is within these segments that components of the later anatomy are laid down. In most vertebrates, the post-otic pharyngeal arches will form the branchial apparatus, while in amniotes these segments are believed to generate the larynx. It has been unclear how the development of these segments has been altered with the emergence of the amniotes.
RESULTS RESULTS
In this study, we examined the development of pharyngeal arches in amniotes and show that the post-otic pharyngeal arches in this clade are greatly diminished. We find that the post-otic segments do not undergo myogenesis or skeletogenesis, but are remodelled before these processes occur. We also find that nested DLX expression, which is a feature of all the pharyngeal arches in anamniotes, is associated with the anterior segments but less so with the posterior arches in amniotes. We further show that the posterior arches of the mouse embryo fail to properly delineate, which demonstrates the lack of function of these posterior segments in later development.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
In amniotes, there has been a loss of the ancestral "branchial" developmental programme that is a general feature of gnathostomes; myogenesis and skeletogenesis This is likely to have facilitated the emergence of the larynx as a new structure not constrained by the segmental organisation of the posterior pharyngeal region.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30788138
doi: 10.1186/s40851-019-0123-5
pii: 123
pmc: PMC6369561
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

6

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

All embryo collection was carried out as prescribed by the UK Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.All authors consent to publication.The authors declare that they have no competing interests.Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Références

Genesis. 2003 Dec;37(4):188-94
pubmed: 14666512
J Anat. 2005 Nov;207(5):437-46
pubmed: 16313386
Dev Dyn. 2006 May;235(5):1310-25
pubmed: 16395689
Evol Dev. 2006 Mar-Apr;8(2):130-41
pubmed: 16509892
Dev Dyn. 2007 Jun;236(6):1650-62
pubmed: 17474117
J Morphol. 2007 Sep;268(9):791-804
pubmed: 17624928
Genesis. 2007 Sep;45(9):593-605
pubmed: 17868096
Mol Cell Neurosci. 2009 Feb;40(2):167-86
pubmed: 19026749
Proc Biol Sci. 2012 Jan 22;279(1727):224-9
pubmed: 21632625
Evodevo. 2012 Oct 01;3(1):24
pubmed: 23020903
PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e47394
pubmed: 23155370
Nat Commun. 2013;4:1436
pubmed: 23385581
Dev Biol. 2013 May 15;377(2):428-48
pubmed: 23473983
J Morphol. 1951 Jan;88(1):49-92
pubmed: 24539719
J Anat. 2014 Nov;225(5):479-91
pubmed: 25201771
Dev Biol. 2015 Jan 15;397(2):293-304
pubmed: 25446275
Zoological Lett. 2016 Mar 21;2:6
pubmed: 27006783
Endocrinology. 2016 Dec;157(12):4632-4640
pubmed: 27732089
Elife. 2017 Feb 13;6:
pubmed: 28177282
Dev Biol. 1987 Nov;124(1):91-110
pubmed: 3666314
Development. 1997 Aug;124(15):2945-60
pubmed: 9247337
Curr Biol. 1998 Dec 3;8(24):1323-6
pubmed: 9843687

Auteurs

Subathra Poopalasundaram (S)

1Centre for Developmental Neurobiology, King's College London, London, UK.

Jo Richardson (J)

1Centre for Developmental Neurobiology, King's College London, London, UK.

Annabelle Scott (A)

1Centre for Developmental Neurobiology, King's College London, London, UK.

Alex Donovan (A)

2Centre for Craniofacial and Regenerative Biology, King's College London, London, SE1 1UL UK.

Karen Liu (K)

2Centre for Craniofacial and Regenerative Biology, King's College London, London, SE1 1UL UK.

Anthony Graham (A)

1Centre for Developmental Neurobiology, King's College London, London, UK.

Classifications MeSH