Search for: All records

Static allometry is a major component of morphological variation. Much of the literature on the development of allometry investigates how functional perturbations of diverse pathways affect the relationship between trait size and body size. Often, this is done with the explicit objective to identify developmental mechanisms that enable the sensing of organ size and the regulation of relative growth. However, changes in relative trait size can also be brought about by a range of other distinctly different developmental processes, such as changes in patterning or tissue folding, yet standard univariate biometric approaches are usually unable to distinguish among alternative explanations. Here, we utilize geometric morphometrics to investigate the degree to which functional genetic manipulations known to affect thesizeof dung beetle horns also recapitulate the effect of hornshapeallometry. We reasoned that the knockdown phenotypes of pathways governing relative growth should closely resemble shape variation induced by natural allometric variation. In contrast, we predicted that if genes primarily affect alternative developmental processes, knockdown effects should align poorly with shape allometry. We find that the knockdown effects of several genes (e.g.,doublesex, Foxo) indeed closely aligned with shape allometry, indicating that their corresponding pathways may indeed function primarily in the regulation of relative trait growth. In contrast, other knockdown effects (e.g.,Distal‐less,dachs) failed to align with allometry, implicating these pathways in potentially scaling‐independent processes. Our findings moderate the interpretation of studies focusing on trait length and highlight the usefulness of multivariate approaches to study allometry and phenotypic plasticity.

 

The degree to which developmental systems bias the phenotypic effects of environmental and genetic variation, and how these biases affect evolution, is subject to much debate. Here, we assess whether developmental variability in beetle horn shape aligns with the phenotypic effects of plasticity and evolutionary divergence, yielding three salient results. First, we find that most pathways previously shown to regulate horn length also affect shape. Second, we find that the phenotypic effects of manipulating divergent developmental pathways are correlated with each other as well as multivariate fluctuating asymmetry—a measure of developmental variability. Third, these effects further aligned with thermal plasticity, population differences and macroevolutionary divergence between sister taxa and more distantly related species. Collectively, our results support the hypothesis that changes in horn shape—whether brought about by environmentally plastic responses, functional manipulations or evolutionary divergences—converge along ‘developmental lines of least resistance’, i.e. are biased by the developmental system underpinning horn shape. 

Modification of serially homologous structures is a common avenue towards functional innovation in developmental evolution, yet ancestral affinities among serial homologues may be obscured as structure-specific modifications accumulate over time. We sought to assess the degree of homology to wings of three types of body wall projections commonly observed in scarab beetles: (i) the dorsomedial support structures found on the second and third thoracic segments of pupae, (ii) the abdominal support structures found bilaterally in most abdominal segments of pupae, and (iii) the prothoracic horns which depending on species and sex may be restricted to pupae or also found in adults. We functionally investigated 14 genes within, as well as two genes outside, the canonical wing gene regulatory network to compare and contrast their role in the formation of each of the three presumed wing serial homologues. We found 11 of 14 wing genes to be functionally required for the proper formation of lateral and dorsal support structures, respectively, and nine for the formation of prothoracic horns. At the same time, we document multiple instances of divergence in gene function across our focal structures. Collectively, our results support the hypothesis that dorsal and lateral support structures as well as prothoracic horns share a developmental origin with insect wings. Our findings suggest that the morphological and underlying gene regulatory diversification of wing serial homologues across species, life stages and segments has contributed significantly to the extraordinary diversity of arthropod appendages and outgrowths. 

Understanding how novel complex traits originate is a foundational challenge in evolutionary biology. We investigated the origin of prothoracic horns in scarabaeine beetles, one of the most pronounced examples of secondary sexual traits in the animal kingdom. We show that prothoracic horns derive from bilateral source tissues; that diverse wing genes are functionally required for instructing this process; and that, in the absence of Hox input, prothoracic horn primordia transform to contribute to ectopic wings. Once induced, however, the transcriptional profile of prothoracic horns diverges markedly from that of wings and other wing serial homologs. Our results substantiate the serial homology between prothoracic horns and insects wings and suggest that other insect innovations may derive similarly from wing serial homologs and the concomitant establishment of structure-specific transcriptional landscapes. 

Developmental processes transduce diverse influences during phenotype formation, thereby biasing and structuring amount and type of phenotypic variation available for evolutionary processes to act on. The causes, extent, and consequences of this bias are subject to significant debate. Here we explore the role of developmental bias in contributing to organisms’ ability to innovate, to adapt to novel or stressful conditions, and to generate well integrated, resilient phenotypes in the face of perturbations. We focus our inquiry on one taxon, the horned dung beetle genusOnthophagus, and review the role developmental bias might play across several levels of biological organization: (a) gene regulatory networks that pattern specific body regions; (b) plastic developmental mechanisms that coordinate body wide responses to changing environments and; (c) developmental symbioses and niche construction that enable organisms to build teams and to actively modify their own selective environments. We posit that across all these levels developmental bias shapes the way living systems innovate, adapt, and withstand stress, in ways that can alternately limit, bias, or facilitate developmental evolution. We conclude that the structuring contribution of developmental bias in evolution deserves further study to better understand why and how developmental evolution unfolds the way it does.