Alternative development in Polystoma gallieni (Platyhelminthes, Monogenea) and life cycle evolution

2013 ◽  
Vol 135 (2) ◽  
pp. 283-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathieu Badets ◽  
Louis Du Preez ◽  
Olivier Verneau
Author(s):  
Jan A. Pechenik

I have a Hardin cartoon on my office door. It shows a series of animals thinking about the meaning of life. In sequence, we see a lobe-finned fish, a salamander, a lizard, and a monkey, all thinking, “Eat, survive, reproduce; eat, survive, reproduce.” Then comes man: “What's it all about?” he wonders. Organisms live to reproduce. The ultimate selective pressure on any organism is to survive long enough and well enough to pass genetic material to a next generation that will also be successful in reproducing. In this sense, then, every morphological, physiological, biochemical, or behavioral adaptation contributes to reproductive success, making the field of life cycle evolution a very broad one indeed. Key components include mode of sexuality, age and size at first reproduction (Roff, this volume), number of reproductive episodes in a lifetime, offspring size (Messina and Fox, this volume), fecundity, the extent to which parents protect their offspring and how that protection is achieved, source of nutrition during development, survival to maturity, the consequences of shifts in any of these components, and the underlying mechanisms responsible for such shifts. Many of these issues are dealt with in other chapters. Here I focus exclusively on animals, and on a particularly widespread sort of life cycle that includes at least two ecologically distinct free-living stages. Such “complex life cycles” (Istock 1967) are especially common among amphibians and fishes (Hall and Wake 1999), and within most invertebrate groups, including insects (Gilbert and Frieden 1981), crustaceans, bivalves, gastropods, polychaete worms, echinoderms, bryozoans, and corals and other cnidarians (Thorson 1950). In such life cycles, the juvenile or adult stage is reached by metamorphosing from a preceding, free-living larval stage. In many species, metamorphosis involves a veritable revolution in morphology, ecology, behavior, and physiology, sometimes taking place in as little as a few minutes or a few hours. In addition to the issues already mentioned, key components of such complex life cycles include the timing of metamorphosis (i.e., when it occurs), the size at which larvae metamorphose, and the consequences of metamorphosing at particular times or at particular sizes. The potential advantages of including larval stages in the life history have been much discussed.


2001 ◽  
Vol 79 (7) ◽  
pp. 1125-1170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry R McEdward ◽  
Benjamin G Miner

We review the literature on larval development of 182 asteroids, 20 crinoids, 177 echinoids, 69 holothuroids, and 67 ophiuroids. For each class, we describe the various larval types, common features of a larval body plan, developmental patterns in terms of life-cycle character states and sequences of larval stages, phylogenetic distribution of these traits, and infer evolutionary transitions that account for the documented diversity. Asteroids, echinoids, holothuroids, and ophiuroids, but not crinoids, have feeding larvae. All five classes have evolved nonfeeding larvae. Direct development has been documented in asteroids, echinoids, and ophiuroids. Facultative planktotrophy has been documented only in echinoids. It is surprising that benthic, free-living, feeding larvae have not been reported in echinoderms. From this review, we conclude that it is the ecological and functional demands on larvae which impose limits on developmental evolution and determine the associations of larval types and life-cycle character states that give rise to the developmental patterns that we observe in echinoderms. Two factors seriously limit analyses of larval and life-cycle evolution in echinoderms. First is the limited understanding of developmental diversity and second is the lack of good phylogenies.


2018 ◽  
Vol 285 (1871) ◽  
pp. 20172304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald M. Bonett ◽  
John G. Phillips ◽  
Nicholus M. Ledbetter ◽  
Samuel D. Martin ◽  
Luke Lehman

Life cycle strategies have evolved extensively throughout the history of metazoans. The expression of disparate life stages within a single ontogeny can present conflicts to trait evolution, and therefore may have played a major role in shaping metazoan forms. However, few studies have examined the consequences of adding or subtracting life stages on patterns of trait evolution. By analysing trait evolution in a clade of closely related salamander lineages we show that shifts in the number of life cycle stages are associated with rapid phenotypic evolution. Specifically, salamanders with an aquatic-only (paedomorphic) life cycle have frequently added vertebrae to their trunk skeleton compared with closely related lineages with a complex aquatic-to-terrestrial (biphasic) life cycle. The rate of vertebral column evolution is also substantially lower in biphasic lineages, which may reflect the functional compromise of a complex cycle. This study demonstrates that the consequences of life cycle evolution can be detected at very fine scales of divergence. Rapid evolutionary responses can result from shifts in selective regimes following changes in life cycle complexity.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document