MicroRNAs support the monophyly of enteropneust hemichordates

Peterson, Kevin J.; Su, Yi-Hsien; Arnone, Maria Ina; Swalla, Billie J.; King, Benjamin L.

doi:10.1002/jez.b.22510

Cited by 26 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Winchell et al 2002, Cameron et al 2005, while others suggested that the Enteropneusta are a paraphyletic group with the family Harrimaniidae as a sister group to the monophyletic Pterobranchia (Halanych 1995, Cameron et al 2000, Bourlat et al 2006, Cannon et al 2009). Recently, however, Peterson et al (2013) provided MicroRNA support for a monophyly of Enteropneusta.…”

Section: Repositoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The classification of the Pterobranchia (Cephalodiscida and Graptolithina)

Maletz¹

2014

Bull. Geosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a proposal for a taxonomic approach to the classification of the Pterobranchia (Cephalodiscida and Graptolithina) to be adopted for the revision of the Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part V (Hemichordata), currently in preparation. A combination of traditional Linnaean taxonomy, supported by cladistic analyses in some groups is proposed herein as a practical solution for the classification of the Graptolithina as for many groups a cladistic analysis has never been attempted and is unlikely to be undertaken in the near future. The number of ranked taxa has been kept as low as possible, with all genus level taxa referred to a family. All families and higher taxonomic units are discussed, but new taxa have not been introduced. Paraphyletic (but not polyphyletic) taxa are accepted as useful units in this classification. A number of recently introduced taxonomic units, based on cladistic analyses (e.g. Eugraptoloida, Pan-Reclinata, Pan-Bireclinata), are discussed in the context of this classification and the usefulness of these taxa is critically evaluated. The solution proposed here opts not to name a number of nodes from the published cladistic analyses that potentially could be named and in some cases have been named -not to inflate the hierarchy of the used taxonomic system. Taxa are kept as close as possible to their original definition and not unnecessarily expanded or restricted. The taxonomy proposed here for the Graptolithina indicates that the extensive use of higher level taxa, e.g. orders for small groups of genera as has been done for many benthic graptolite groups in the past is unnecessary and should be avoided.•

show abstract

Section: Repositoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The classification of the Pterobranchia (Cephalodiscida and Graptolithina)

Maletz¹

2014

Bull. Geosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…*Acoela are sometimes combined with Xenoturbella, indicating perhaps limited molecular distinction between basic bilaterians and basic deuterostomes. Compiled after (Gyoja, 2014, Osigus, et al, 2013, Peterson, et al, 2013, Schnitzler, et al, 2014, Suga, et al, 2013, Swalla and Smith, 2008)…”

Section: Figmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This review is organized to reflect the currently accepted systematic relationships among metazoans (Fig. 1), in particular deuterostomes (Bourlat, et al, 2006, Nosenko, et al, 2013, Osigus, et al, 2013, Peterson, et al, 2013, Satoh, 2008, Swalla and Smith, 2008). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolving gene regulatory networks into cellular networks guiding adaptive behavior: an outline how single cells could have evolved into a centralized neurosensory system

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding the evolution of the neurosensory system of man, able to reflect on its own origin, is one of the major goals of comparative neurobiology. Details of the origin of neurosensory cells, their aggregation into central nervous systems and associated sensory organs, their localized patterning into remarkably different cell types aggregated into variably sized parts of the central nervous system begin to emerge. Insights at the cellular and molecular level begin to shed some light on the evolution of neurosensory cells, partially covered in this review. Molecular evidence suggests that high mobility group (HMG) proteins of pre-metazoans evolved into the definitive Sox [SRY (sex determining region Y)-box] genes used for neurosensory precursor specification in metazoans. Likewise, pre-metazoan basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH) genes evolved in metazoans into the group A bHLH genes dedicated to neurosensory differentiation in bilaterians. Available evidence suggests that the Sox and bHLH genes evolved a cross-regulatory network able to synchronize expansion of precursor populations and their subsequent differentiation into novel parts of the brain or sensory organs. Molecular evidence suggests metazoans evolved patterning gene networks early and not dedicated to neuronal development. Only later in evolution were these patterning gene networks tied into the increasing complexity of diffusible factors, many of which were already present in pre-metazoans, to drive local patterning events. It appears that the evolving molecular basis of neurosensory cell development may have led, in interaction with differentially expressed patterning genes, to local network modifications guiding unique specializations of neurosensory cells into sensory organs and various areas of the central nervous system.

show abstract

“…However, recent evidence suggests that enteropneusts have dense agglomerations of neurons associated with a neuropil, forming two cords, ventral and dorsal, that resemble a centralized nervous system [Nomaksteinsky et al, 2009]. Moreover, phylogenomic microRNA data refute their basal position in the deuterostome lineage [Peterson et al, 2013], suggesting not only the secondary loss of brain signaling centers during development [Pani et al, 2012], but also of the brain itself in hemichordates [Hirth, 2010].…”

Section: Is Convergence a Useful Explanation For The Evolution Of Bramentioning

confidence: 99%

Homology versus Convergence in Resolving Transphyletic Correspondences of Brain Organization

Strausfeld

Hirth

2013

Brain Behav Evol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to the largely absent fossil record, phylogenetic comparisons of brain structures rely on the analysis of nervous systems in extant taxa, many of which appear to have distinctive and dissimilar neural arrangements. The use of a multitude of comparative criteria, including developmental genetics, phylogenomics and neural circuit architecture, has recently resolved a highly conserved structural and functional ground pattern organization in the arthropod central complex and vertebrate basal ganglia. The minuteness of resemblance is exemplified by orthologous action selection circuits that are formed by homologous gene networks and which can lead to similar pathologies and behavioral disorders. It has been argued, however, that these similarities of brain centers can only be due to convergent evolution. What is still missing is a plausible scenario to explain how convergence could result in such a multitude of similarities and minuteness of resemblances, including gene expression, functional attributes and pathologies. In contrast, homology by common descent is the more parsimonious explanation. Moreover, the divergent elaboration of arthropod central complex and vertebrate basal ganglia does not obscure their shared ground pattern organization and thus genealogical correspondence.

show abstract

MicroRNAs support the monophyly of enteropneust hemichordates

Cited by 26 publications

References 42 publications

The classification of the Pterobranchia (Cephalodiscida and Graptolithina)

The classification of the Pterobranchia (Cephalodiscida and Graptolithina)

Evolving gene regulatory networks into cellular networks guiding adaptive behavior: an outline how single cells could have evolved into a centralized neurosensory system

Homology versus Convergence in Resolving Transphyletic Correspondences of Brain Organization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About