Pharyngula

Pharyngula has moved to http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

Wednesday, October 05, 2005

The evolution of deuterostome gastrulation

Echoed on the Panda's Thumb

Do vertebrate embryos exhibit significant variation in their early development? Yes, they do—in particular, the earliest stages show distinct differences that mainly reflect differences in maternal investment and that cause significant distortions of early morphology during gastrulation. However, these earliest patterns represent workarounds, strategies to accommodate one variable (the amount of yolk in the egg), and the animals subsequently reorganize to put tissues into a canonical arrangement. Observations of gene expression during gastrulation are revealing deeper similarities that are common in all deuterostomes—not just vertebrates, but also the invertebrate chordates (tunicates and cephalochordates) and echinoderms.

What does all that mean? If you think of development as a formal dance, the earliest stages are like the prelude; everyone is getting out of their chairs around the ballroom, looking for partners and working their way towards the floor. The dispositions of the dancers are variable and somewhat chaotic, and vary from dance to dance. Once they get to their positions, however, we're finding that not only is there a general similarity in their arrangements, but they're all dancing to the very same tune. In this case, one of the repeated motifs in that tune is a gene, Nodal, which is active in gastrulation and shows a similar pattern in animal after animal.

nodal
Holoblastic cleavage of a sea urchin embryo

Let's begin with the players beginning to take their places. There is much variation in how different deuterostomes carry out their earliest cell divisions, variation that we can reduce to two different categories: holoblastic vs. meroblastic cleavage.

Holoblastic cleavage is the easiest to visualize. The fertilized one-cell zygote divides completely into two separate cells, then each cell divides completely again to produce four cells, and again and again. The end result is a clustered mass of cells that resembles a bunch of grapes, or the druplets of a raspberry. This is the pattern of cleavage that we humans (and all mammals) use.

nodal
Meroblastic cleavage of a zebrafish embryo (the two partially separated cells are on top)

Meroblastic cleavages are incomplete divisions. The nuclei of the cell replicate and divide completely, but when cytokinesis (the actual division of the cytoplasm and membrane) occurs, only a partial membrane forms. This kind of division occurs in very yolky eggs, such as a chicken egg, and is a reasonable compromise to allow replication to occur rapidly by not bothering with the assembly of massive amounts of membrane. The yolk of a chicken egg is a single cell; imagine that having to be subdivided with new membranes at every division. Instead, the embryo typically forms as one small disc on the surface of the massive ball of yolk.

Holoblastic cleavage is almost certainly the ancestral condition, and is common in the invertebrate chordate phyla. Any animal that packs its eggs with lots of yolk, however, evolves the meroblastic shortcut at some point, and so a cladogram of the patterns of early cleavage looks rather chaotic—no nested hierarchies are easily visible here!

nodal
Cleavage patterns within the Chordates. Ascidians, lancelets, and lamprey display holoblastic cleavage, suggesting that it is the ancestral cleavage pattern in chordates. Ascidians have bilateral cleavage, while lancelets display radial cleavage. Lamprey and amphibians have meso-lecithal eggs, with larger, yolky cells confined to the vegetal half of the embryo. Present day teleost fish show meroblastic cleavage, which evolved independently in fish and amniotes. Mammals show a reversion to holoblastic cleavage, but exhibit rotational cleavage.

We can see the evolutionary relationships in other ways, though. Animals with meroblastic cleavage produce many cells, and eventually those cells migrate to engulf the uncleaved mass of the yolk. The cells that migrate eventually produce a thin membrane around it called the yolk sac. We mammals are a revealing example: from the cladogram, you'd predict that we had a reptilian ancestor that divided meroblastically, and that we secondarily lost that pattern of cleavage and readopted the ancestral holoblastic pattern as a consequence of not bothering to pack our eggs with yolk (instead, our eggs stay resident in women's bodies and draw nourishment directly). Yet our zygotes still divide into many cells, and then a sub-population migrates to surround a fluid-filled, yolkless space—they make a yolk sac.

Out of the variability of the early divisions, however, comes order. The dance begins at gastrulation, when cells begin to make consistent patterns of migration to set up the layered tissues of the embryo. The milling masses of cells begin to line up and order themselves into a bilayered structure. In the diagrams below, you can see that most of the animals form a hollow ball, with one set of tissues above at the animal pole (a), and another set below at the vegetal pole (v). The animals with a more meroblastic cleavage tend to form discs instead of hollow balls, but it's the same structure; the ball has just been flattened. The cell movements that follow consist of directed migrations towards the dorsal side, and invagination into the center of the hollow ball or disc that will produce a mesodermal layer.

nodal
Gastrulation in the deuterostomes. The animal pole (a) is marked by polar bodies; (v) is vegetal pole. (A) is future anterior; (P) is future posterior. In echinoderms and hemichordates, invagination of the endoderm begins at the vegetal pole and the early gastrula is radially symmetrical. The blastopore becomes the future anus of the larvae. In most echinoderms, the animal- vegetal axis becomes the larval A-P axis, except in echinoid and ophiuroid pluteus larvae. In chordates, invagination during gastrulation also begins at the vegetal pole. However, in the Chordata, the future anterior and posterior of the larva are determined by the point of sperm entry, which breaks the symmetry of the radial egg. The embryo posterior develops opposite the point of sperm entry.

Gastrulation is a complex process with many specific cell rearrangements and requiring the activation of many molecules. To keep things manageable, this paper focuses on one, nodal.

Nodal is a signaling molecule, a member of the TGF-β family, which plays a crucial role in gastrulation. In the middle diagram below, it is expressed as a graded signal which specifies where the Spemann organizer is to form—the organizer defines the site where the invagination of cells mentioned above is to occur, and is also a site where other molecules are expressed that signal migrating cells what position and fate they should take. Nodal is a central player in the formation and maintenance of mesoderm in early development.

nodal

Nodal is also a deuterostome universal: this molecule is used in similar ways cephalochordates, tunicates, echinoderms, and vertebrates. It has not been found in arthropods, although there are suggestions that polychaetes and molluscs may have a form of it. (All do have TFG-β molecules, just not the specific Nodal gene).

There is another critical function for nodal. It is later expressed in an asymmetric pattern, with a domain of expression on just one side. Slap your left side; it doesn't matter whether you are left- or right-handed (although it does matter if you have situs inversus), you've found the side of your body where nodal was active when you were a little embryo. It's also the same side where nodal was turned on in mice and frogs and fish and cephalochordates and tunicates, as you can see in the Late Gastrulation diagram below. It is also turned on asymmetrically in sea urchins, but it's got a rather more complicated relationship to morphology there—it's turned on in the region of the sea urchin's prospective mouth.

nodal
Comparison of vertebrate nodal and nodal-related gene expression to lancelets, ascidians, and sea urchins. Animals are shown at early gastrulation (top, A–K) and after completion of gastrulation (bottom, B–L). Areas of nodal expression are indicated by heavy areas of shading. A: In mouse gastrulae, nodal is expressed bilaterally around the node. B: By early somite stages, nodal is expressed asymmetrically in the left lateral plate mesoderm and in the node where ingression is occurring. C: In early Xenopus gastrulae, nodal is expressed at the dorsal lip and later (D) in the left lateral plate mesoderm at late neurulation. E: Expression of cyc is localized to the hypoblast layer of the embryonic shield in early zebrafish embryos while sqt is expressed in the dorsal forerunner cells. F: During somitogenesis in zebrafish, cyc and spaw are both expressed in the left lateral plate mesoderm.
G: In lancelets, nodal expression is observed in the hypoblast layer of the dorsal lip. H: At late neurulation, nodal is asymmetrically expressed on the left side of the paraxial mesoderm, gut endoderm, and presumptive oral ectoderm. I: In ascidians, nodal is expressed bilaterally within the presumptive endoderm, epidermis, and trunk lateral cells from the 32-cell stage to early gastrulation. J: By the initial tailbud stage, ascidian nodal is expressed in the left side of the epidermis. K: In sea urchins, nodal expression begins in the presumptive ectoderm at the 60-cell stage, but decreases once gastrulation begins. L: Nodal transcripts are localized in the presumptive oral ectoderm during prism and pluteus stages.

The association with the echinoderm mouth is intriguing. In cephalochordates (the lancelet), the oral opening is initially asymmetric, too…and it forms on the left side. The authors suggest that one very interesting thing to examine would be the pattern of expression of nodal at the time the vertebrate mouth forms; it may have a role in that, too.

I've said a few things before about generating left-right asymmetries in development, and the key observation in us mammals at least is that the initial source of the asymmetry is the clockwise rotation of cilia on the surface of the node, the site of gastrulation. This rotation sets up a net leftward flow of fluids over the gastrula, which is illustrated below. In B, we're looking at a cross-section of an embryo, with a couple of ciliary hairs sprouting up and spinning. At the same time, cells lining the surface are secreting nodal vesicular parcels (NVP), small membrane-bound blobs that contain a payload of signaling molecules, sonic hedgehog (shh) and retinoic acid (ra).

nodal
Breaking left-right symmetry at the node. A: A leftward fluid flow (indicated by arrows) is the earliest known asymmetric event in mammalian left – right determination, resulting in activation of the nodal signaling cascade in the left lateral plate. In contrast in the chick, a cascade of asymmetric gene expression at the node is upstream of the nodal signaling cascade. B: FGF signaling in the node permits nodal vesicular parcel (NVP) production. Nodal flow carries NVPs to the left side of the node where they fragment, releasing lipid, SHH and RA, activating left-sided Ca2+ signalling.

When the NVPs are released, they enter the bulk leftward flow, and are catapulted toward the left side of the embryo—when they contact the surface, they splatter apart, releasing their contents and triggering a signal cascade that eventual stimulates nodal expression. Now that is a Rube Goldberg machine, a weird way generate left-right differential expression of a gene.

As odd and unexpected as the mechanisms might be, the important message is that the deuterostome gastrulation dance seems to be choreographed in similar ways and with similar players. There are fascinating variations in individual species, though, and this molecule is a promising target for studies of the evolving regulation of development.


Chea HK, Wright CV, Swalla BJ (2005) Nodal signaling and the evolution of deuterostome gastrulation. Developmental Dynamics 234:269-278.

Norris D (2005) Breaking the left-right axis: do nodal parcels pass a signal to the left? Bioessays 27:991-994.


Trackback url: http://pharyngula.org/index/trackback/3070/iUxga0N7/

Comments:
's avatar #42796: — 10/05  at  12:56 PM
Just a gorgeous post!

Something that many of us in devo or evo/devo take for granted (or appear to) is the *predictive power* of our field. The power is, of course, derived from evolutionary theory: genes are inherited, gene networks are inherited, etc. Because of this simple fact of inheritence, when I encounter a report of gene interactions in, say, a mouse, I can with great confidence predict a similar interaction in a fish (this is, in fact, my doctoral research). It is just one of many many reason that ID is not in anyway useful in science - there is no predictive power, but only "too hard, something did it and we can learn no more." Poppycock!! All the predictive power we need is right here, and it is indeed lovely.

I just love this site (gushing). It is the best break I take everyday.

Ctenophore cleavage - almost as cool as worm porn.



#42800: — 10/05  at  01:25 PM
Off-topic:
Ancient oceans 'filled with sulphur'

By examining some of the world's best preserved rocks, once under water and now part of land formations near the Gulf of Carpentaria, an Australian scientist has gained a rare glimpse of what the oceans were like 1.6 billion years ago.

Dr Jochen Brocks, of the Australian National University, found the sea was inhabited by purple and green sulphur-loving organisms which depended on light to live.
...
"If indeed the oceans were (full of sulphur) during this middle period of earth's history, it would rewrite much of what we've believed about a fifth of the planet's history," Dr Brocks said.

"It would seem that this is the reason why the world was ruled by bacteria for such a long time."
...



's avatar #42803: — 10/05  at  01:56 PM
Great post. If you have time pls. explain what is "a canonical arrangement"? A disk? A hollow sphere?

Quod natura non sunt turpia



#42805: — 10/05  at  02:04 PM
For the most part, I read this blog for talking points about the nonsense that is ID. However, its nice to know that what I learned in developmental bio class as an undergraduate hasn't been completely forgotten. Fascinating stuff, those gastrulae!



#42807: — 10/05  at  02:52 PM
For the most part, I read this blog for just this--PZ's unutterably wonderful and lucid evo-devo science posts!

But those are, of course, informed and enriched by his exuberant love of life in all its weird and whacky manifestations, and by his acerbic--but still humorous--antiscience rants and other droll "asides."



#42809: — 10/05  at  02:59 PM
Nice post, next to a real biology education your blog is the second best option...

from the cladogram, you'd predict that we had a reptilian ancestor


Do we? As I have understood it, mammals and reptilians parted when amniota split into synapsida and reptilia. Thus, shouldn't birds fork of from reptiles and not from mammals?



#42811: — 10/05  at  03:49 PM
Reading articles like this one I can't help but feel some sorrow for the poor benighted creationists. The sheer coolness of evolution and development is unknown to them, whole vistas of wonder and excitement closed to them. Won't stop me bashing the ones who aren't honestly ignorant, but I can feel some small pity even for those and take some cruel satisfaction that their indomitable stupidity includes its own punishment.



#42813: Arun — 10/05  at  04:14 PM
The description and explanation of development only makes sense in the context of evolution, which provides the organizing framework for understanding myriads of different organisms.

This beautiful exposition provides yet another example.
Thank you!



's avatar #42814: PZ Myers — 10/05  at  04:22 PM
Well, if we wanted to be strictly cladistic about it all...we are reptiles. Also, have you heard the famous phrase, "Monotremes oviparous, ovum meroblastic"?

PZ Myers
Division of Science and Math
University of Minnesota, Morris



#42816: — 10/05  at  04:33 PM
Magnus asked, re mammals arising from reptiles:
Do we? As I have understood it, mammals and reptilians parted when amniota split into synapsida and reptilia. Thus, shouldn't birds fork of from reptiles and not from mammals?

I think what's confusing is the shorthand that both PZ's statement and the cladogram are using. The lines leading to modern reptiles and mammals diverged at the "point" (sequence in time) shown. The critters from which both modern lines arise are, by convention, also called "reptiles," but we could just as well call them "proto mam-tiles" or something equally unwieldy. So the statement that (modern) mammals arose from (ancient) reptiles is correct.
But note that the right side of the reptile-"mammal" split in the gram doesn't immediately lead to modern mammals. If we could "zoom in" on the cladogram line segment between the "reptile"-"mammal" split and the "bird"-"mammal" split, we'd presumably still be looking at a whole group of critturs--not yet all that distinct from our "proto mam-tiles"--which would then give rise to, among other things, both the dinosaurs (somewhat more "reptilian," though not giving rise to modern reptiles) and the early or proto-mammals (somewhat more mammal-like, obviously).
Then the on the dinosaur side of the (unshown) split between 'saurs and proto-mammals, the birds arise (and survive) and the dinos don't. Put another way, you could "fit in" another level of splitting between (what is really) the "proto-bird"-"proto-mammal" split that would show the dino-bird split (and other things, such as splits within the dino lineage...).
And, of course, the proto-mammal side of the split does give rise to the modern mammals. So we're really seeing a "compressed" version of the total 'gram, and it's backwards-looking, in the sense that the labels refer to (some of) the surviving lineages, and not all of the splits and lineages along the way are shown in full...
Does that make sense, or simply add to the confusion?
(If I'm getting this wrong, of course, someone will straighten us both out.)
And of course my validation word below is, ta-duh, "dinosaur."



#42818: John Timmer — 10/05  at  04:41 PM
My understanding was that there's a recently arising school of thought that suggests that at asymmetry arises less from the transit of signaling molecules in the nodal flow, and more from the physical sensing of the flow itself. More specifically, the motile cilia trigger a flow, which is sensed in nearby cells using non-motile cilia, triggering a calcium flux.

A quick link (may be subscriber only) describing this is here:
http://www.jcb.org/cgi/content/full/162/3/362

Now if the ID folks want a controversy, L/R asymmetry may have one brewing...



#42819: — 10/05  at  05:16 PM
Magnus, the amniotes split into three existing lineages; synapsids, diapsids, and anapsids. Mammals are synapsids while lizards, birds, crocodiles, and dinosaurs are all diapsid reptiles. The cladogram is technically correct if you read the "Reptiles" as Turtles, the only living anapsid lineage. The figure still illustrates the point that mammals secondarily returned to holoblastic cleavage.



#42820: — 10/05  at  05:23 PM
Where’s the ciliary mutant series?
What does the null mutant look like?
What happens if they rotate the other way?

Is the grand old designer left handed?



#42840: Joel — 10/05  at  09:49 PM
Are those holoblastic cells mooning the creationists do you think?



#42877: Jeff Fecke — 10/06  at  09:34 AM
I love this type of article, even though much of it flies over my head. It's good to know that someone's out there trying to run this stuff down. And this is a bit more compelling than "Golly, some stuff is just too hard for us to understand--must be God."

Although this still doesn't explain PYGMIES and DWARVES.



's avatar #42934: — 10/06  at  01:20 PM
Ohh, now PZ has turned me on to cleavages too! But it was gorgeous.

"If you have time pls. explain what is "a canonical arrangement"? A disk? A hollow sphere?" I think the generical arrangements are both, as the first gastrulation diagram depicts.

POO: Shouldn't it be "anti-antiscience rant"?! wink

"Is the grand old designer left handed?" I don't know how he was created, but the old jerk off surely seems to have used it a lot. Maybe he never married?



's avatar #42937: — 10/06  at  01:30 PM
PC correction: Uuups, never meant to disparage singles. I meant that he had no partner at all. I guess the angels didn't measure up to his status.



's avatar #42938: — 10/06  at  01:35 PM
Yep, that must be it. They were beneath him. grin



#42992: — 10/06  at  07:53 PM
If there's anything worse than a lurker, it's a lurker who posts days late when he or she finally posts...but anyway.

However, in the Chordata, the future anterior and posterior of the larva are determined by the point of sperm entry, which breaks the symmetry of the radial egg.

True in amphibians, but how widespread is this within vertebrates? Certainly not true of zebrafish, where the sperm is forced to enter at the animal pole. I've always wondered...since embryos can break radial symmetry (if indeed they really are radially symmetric at the molecular level) even when sperm entry is at the pole, why has this SEP-oriented mechanism evolved?

Also, there is great work in zebrafish on nodal-dependent forebrain laterality, which is independent of early nodal activity. So is there something about the nodal pathway that makes it particularly good at promoting asymmetry?



Page 1 of 1 pages

Next entry: noitulovE

Previous entry: Tangled Bank #38

<< Back to main

Info

email PZ Myers
Search
Archives
UMM—America's best public liberal arts college