Plasticity and constraints in development and evolution

Hodin, Jason

doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-010x(20000415)288:1<1::aid-jez1>3.0.co;2-7

Cited by 73 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 116 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, developmental and physiological differences between insect and human eyes are enormous, suggesting differential recruitment of downstream programs of eye formation in each lineage under the same master regulators (Pichaud et al, 2001;Nilsson, 2004). Such genetic conservation of master regulation is explained as a result of evolutionary constraints of regulatory circuits for cuing some developmental processes (Hodin, 2000). Identifying where genetic differences occur in each eye development pathway will shed light on understanding the developmental differences arising during evolution.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recruitment of CRABS CLAW to promote nectary development within the eudicot clade

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nectaries are secretory organs that are widely present in flowering plants that function to attract floral pollinators. Owing to diversity in nectary positions and structures, they are thought to have originated multiple times during angiosperm evolution, with their potential contribution to the diversification of flowering plants and pollinating animals being considerable. We investigated the genetic basis of diverse nectary forms in eudicot angiosperm species using CRABS CLAW (CRC), a gene required for nectaries in Arabidopsis. CRC expression is conserved in morphologically different nectaries from several core eudicot species and is required for nectary development in both rosids and asterids,two major phylogenetic lineages of eudicots. However, in a basal eudicot species, no evidence of CRC expression in nectaries was found. Considering the phylogenetic distribution of nectary positions and CRC expression analyses in eudicots, we propose that diverse nectaries in core eudicots share conserved CRC gene regulation, and that derived nectary positions in eudicots have altered regulation of CRC. As the ancestral function of CRC lies in the regulation of carpel development, it may have been co-opted as a regulator of nectary development within the eudicots, concomitant with the association of nectaries with reproductive organs in derived lineages.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recruitment of CRABS CLAW to promote nectary development within the eudicot clade

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rather, it shows that the pathway, or pathways, to hyperphalangy found outside of mammals are rarely followed within the mammals. Thus, as has been argued, parallelism (independent evolution using the same mechanism) can be evidence of developmental constraint (Wake, '91;Hodin, 2000).…”

Section: Critique Of the Phylogenetic Approach To Constraintsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Developmental constraints in a comparative framework: A test case using variations in phalanx number during amniote evolution

Richardson

Chipman

2003

J Exp Zool Pt B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Constraints are factors that limit evolutionary change. A subset of constraints is developmental, and acts during embryonic development. There is some uncertainty about how to define developmental constraints, and how to formulate them as testable hypotheses. Furthermore, concepts such as constraint-breaking, universal constraints, and forbidden morphologies present some conceptual difficulties. One of our aims is to clarify these issues. After briefly reviewing current classifications of constraint, we define developmental constraints as those affecting morphogenetic processes in ontogeny. They may be generative or selective, although a clear distinction cannot always be drawn. We support the idea that statements about constraints are in fact statements about the relative frequency of particular transformations (where 'transformation' indicates a change from the ancestral condition). An important consequence of this is that the same transformation may be constrained in one developmental or phylogenetic context, but evolutionarily plastic in another. In this paper, we analyse developmental constraints within a phylogenetic framework, building on similar work by previous authors. Our approach is based on the following assumptions from the literature: (1) constraints are identified when there is a discrepancy between the observed frequency of a transformation, and its expected frequency; (2) the 'expected' distribution is derived by examining the phylogenetic distribution of the transformation and its associated selection pressures. Thus, by looking for congruence between these various phylogenetic distribution patterns, we can test hypotheses about constraint. We critically examine this approach using a test case: variation in phalanx-number in the amniote limb.

show abstract

“…Developmental canalization (Waddington's epigenetic landscape) and plasticity correspond to the developmental route towards regulating change (Jablonka and Lamb 2002, 85). While the former decouples phenotypic and genetic change in explaining dynamic stabilization, the latter is invoked in the explanations of biological innovation, that is, the convergence of different developmental pathways on similar solutions (Hodin 2000). There is a counter view of convergent change as the outcome of phylogenetic constraints that drive different 14 biological solutions towards similar ends, given the shared problem of adaptation to a limited set of environments and ecological niches (Moore and Willmer 1997, 12).…”

Section: : Models Of Evolutionary Changementioning

confidence: 99%

Evolutionary inventive problem-solving in biology and architecture: ArchiTRIZ and Material-Ontology

Hensel

Vincent

2015

Intelligent Buildings International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phenotypic similarity between unrelated organisms, known as convergence, is a result of shared problems of adaptation to similar environments and limited ecological range. Their separate genetic histories imply a developmental route to biological innovation. Convergence as a model of evolutionary change has been applied to biological evolutionary reasoning and functional studies. We propose its application to biologically-driven convergence for innovations in design. This route necessitates at least the comparability of architecture with biology on three levels: (1) evolutionary design reasoning (2) convergence of design solutions, and (3) ecological niche concept. These combine in ArchiTRIZ, which is introduced as a derivative of TRIZ (a Russian system of inventive problem-solving) in architecture. We are building an ontology of convergence based on wood and ceramics on ArchiTRIZ model framework called Material-Ontology [MatOnt].As a computational design tool, MatOnt can activate systematic transfer of knowledge from biology to architecture and integrate data to develop materialbased structural systems with multi-functional and adaptive properties that can be adapted for locally specific architectural applications. Convergence gives direction by highlighting natural models with potential for innovative design, some of which are discussed briefly.

show abstract

Plasticity and constraints in development and evolution

Cited by 73 publications

References 116 publications

Recruitment of CRABS CLAW to promote nectary development within the eudicot clade

Recruitment of CRABS CLAW to promote nectary development within the eudicot clade

Developmental constraints in a comparative framework: A test case using variations in phalanx number during amniote evolution

Evolutionary inventive problem-solving in biology and architecture: ArchiTRIZ and Material-Ontology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About