2008
DOI: 10.1007/s12052-008-0086-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

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

Abstract: 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, wh… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
57
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

4
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 114 publications
(129 reference statements)
0
57
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In Drosophila, the specification of lensproducing cells during compound eye development is contingent on the preceding differentiation of photoreceptor cells (Wolff and Ready, 1993). As the cellular dynamics of retinal differentiation is highly conserved in other insect species (for a review, see Buschbeck and Friedrich, 2008), one has to assume that the dependence of lens formation on photoreceptor differentiation is also widely conserved. The question therefore arises as to how the presence of lateral lens structures can be reconciled with the presumed absence of photoreceptors in P. hirtus.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Drosophila, the specification of lensproducing cells during compound eye development is contingent on the preceding differentiation of photoreceptor cells (Wolff and Ready, 1993). As the cellular dynamics of retinal differentiation is highly conserved in other insect species (for a review, see Buschbeck and Friedrich, 2008), one has to assume that the dependence of lens formation on photoreceptor differentiation is also widely conserved. The question therefore arises as to how the presence of lateral lens structures can be reconciled with the presumed absence of photoreceptors in P. hirtus.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Stemmata frequently are not multifaceted like compound eyes, but vary greatly from simple photosensitive organs (such as in many dipterans) to sophisticated camera-type eyes, such as those found in the tiger beetle Cicindela chinensis (Gilbert, 1994;Land and Nilsson, 2002;Toh and Mizutani, 1987;Toh and Mizutani, 1994;Toh and Okamura, 2007). Despite this diversity, careful morphological studies (Paulus, 1979) as well as more recent molecular work (Buschbeck and Friedrich, 2008;Liu and Friedrich, 2004) suggest that stemmata most probably evolved from the most anterior portion of the compound eyes of their hemimetabolous ancestors.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In some instances they are extremely reduced, in others they have evolved to represent highly sophisticated image-forming chamber eyes. Perhaps the most dramatic and best understood (Buschbeck and Friedrich, 2008) example of reduced stemmata is the Bolwig organ of cyclorrhaphan flies, which lacks image resolution and only has 12 photoreceptors. Although the origin of this organ originally had been questioned, detailed comparative work (Melzer and Paulus, 1989;Paulus, 1989) and the presence of common molecular mechanisms (Friedrich, 2006;Friedrich, 2008) have clarified its compound eye ancestry.…”
Section: Reduced Stemmata and General Considerations For The Evolutiomentioning
confidence: 99%