Amazing grass: developmental genetics of maize domestication

Crop plants were domesticated by prehistoric farmers through artificial selection to provide a means of feeding the human population. This article discusses the developmental genetics of crop domestication and improvement, including the historical framework and recent approaches in maize and other grasses. In many cases, selecting for a plant form that correlates with productivity involves controlling meristem activity. In the domestication of modern maize from its progenitor Zea mays ssp. parviglumis, QTL (quantitative trait loci) mapping, genetics and population genomics approaches have identified several genes that contain signatures of selection. Only a few genes involved in the derivation of the highly productive maize ear have been identified, including teosinte glume architecture1 and ramosa1. Future prospects hinge on forward and reverse genetics, as well as on other approaches from the developing discipline of evo-devo (evolutionary developmental biology).

Download Full-text

Evolutionary developmental biology

Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy ◽

10.4324/9780415249126-q123-1 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Ron Amundson

Keyword(s):

Developmental Biology ◽

Evolutionary Developmental Biology ◽

Developmental Genetics ◽

Comparative Biology ◽

Embryological Development ◽

Adult Form ◽

The Core ◽

Almost All ◽

Evo Devo ◽

Year 2000

Evolutionary developmental biology is the study of evolutionary change (called phylogeny) as it is revealed through the embryological development of individual organisms (called ontogeny). On this approach, the understanding of ontogeny contributes to our understanding of phylogeny, and vice versa. Evolutionary thinkers of the nineteenth century almost all held what may be called the core doctrine of evolutionary developmental biology: that in order to achieve a modification in the adult form, evolution must modify the embryological processes responsible for that form, so that an understanding of evolution requires an understanding of development. Evolutionary theory has no theoretical need for developmental views of evolution. Beginning around 1990 a series of discoveries and theoretical innovations in developmental genetics led to the reinvigoration of developmental approaches to evolution. Evolutionary developmental biology (‘evo-devo’ as it is now called) was inaugurated as a Division of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology in the year 2000.

Download Full-text

An Evo-Devo Perspective on Analogy in Biology

Philosophies ◽

10.3390/philosophies4010005 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 5 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Alessandro Minelli

Keyword(s):

Developmental Biology ◽

Evolutionary Developmental Biology ◽

Developmental Processes ◽

Adaptive Value ◽

Nature Play ◽

Plant Form ◽

Evo Devo ◽

Survival Of The Fittest

To explain the amazing morphological and biomechanical analogy between two distantly related vertebrates as are a dolphin and a shark, an explanation exclusively framed in terms of adaptation (i.e., in terms of the Darwinian survival of the fittest) is far from satisfactory. The same is true, of course, of any other comparison between structurally similar, but phylogenetically unrelated organisms. A purely evolutionary argument does not throw any light on how the developmental processes of their ancestors could eventually evolve in such a way as to eventually produce these peculiar phenotypes (the arrival of the fittest). How does Nature play with animal and plant form? To address the issue of the evolution of possible forms, we cannot ignore that these are products of development. This invites adopting the integrated perspective, currently known as evolutionary developmental biology, or evo-devo. Paths through the maze of living forms are not satisfactorily explained in terms of pure geometrical transformations or of the adaptive value of the phenotypes eventually produced. The emergence of form is largely dependent on the intrinsic evolvability of the developmental processes that translate the genotype into phenotypes. As a consequence, development makes analogous structures more likely to evolve than a pure adaptationist argument would ever suggest.

Download Full-text

Evo-Devo and the Structure(s) of Evolutionary Theory

10.1093/oso/9780199377176.003.0005 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Alan C. Love

Keyword(s):

Developmental Biology ◽

Evolutionary Theory ◽

Mechanistic Explanation ◽

Evolutionary Developmental Biology ◽

Primary Concern ◽

Adaptive Function ◽

Specific Content ◽

Central Location ◽

Developmental Form ◽

Evo Devo

Many researchers have argued that evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo) constitutes a challenge to standard evolutionary theory, requiring the explicit inclusion of developmental processes that generate variation and attention to organismal form (rather than adaptive function). An analysis of these developmental-form challenges indicates that the primary concern is not the inclusion of specific content but the epistemic organization or structure of evolutionary theory. Proponents of developmental-form challenges favor moving their considerations to a more central location in evolutionary theorizing, in part because of a commitment to the value of mechanistic explanation. This chapter argues there are multiple legitimate structures for evolutionary theory, instead of a single, overarching or canonical organization, and different theory presentations can be understood as idealizations that serve different investigative and explanatory goals in evolutionary inquiry.

Download Full-text

Where is, in 2017, the evo in evo-devo (evolutionary developmental biology)?

Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B Molecular and Developmental Evolution ◽

10.1002/jez.b.22791 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 330 (1) ◽

pp. 15-22 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Rui Diogo

Keyword(s):

Developmental Biology ◽

Evolutionary Developmental Biology ◽

Evo Devo

Download Full-text

Morphology and behaviour: functional links in development and evolution

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences ◽

10.1098/rstb.2011.0035 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 366 (1574) ◽

pp. 2056-2068 ◽

Cited By ~ 32

Author(s):

Rinaldo C. Bertossa

Keyword(s):

Phenotypic Diversity ◽

Decisive Role ◽

Evolutionary Developmental Biology ◽

Form And Function ◽

Biological Hierarchy ◽

Object Of Study ◽

And Function ◽

Evo Devo ◽

Versus Behaviour ◽

Development And Evolution

Development and evolution of animal behaviour and morphology are frequently addressed independently, as reflected in the dichotomy of disciplines dedicated to their study distinguishing object of study (morphology versus behaviour) and perspective (ultimate versus proximate). Although traits are known to develop and evolve semi-independently, they are matched together in development and evolution to produce a unique functional phenotype. Here I highlight similarities shared by both traits, such as the decisive role played by the environment for their ontogeny. Considering the widespread developmental and functional entanglement between both traits, many cases of adaptive evolution are better understood when proximate and ultimate explanations are integrated. A field integrating these perspectives is evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo), which studies the developmental basis of phenotypic diversity. Ultimate aspects in evo-devo studies—which have mostly focused on morphological traits—could become more apparent when behaviour, ‘the integrator of form and function’, is integrated into the same framework of analysis. Integrating a trait such as behaviour at a different level in the biological hierarchy will help to better understand not only how behavioural diversity is produced, but also how levels are connected to produce functional phenotypes and how these evolve. A possible framework to accommodate and compare form and function at different levels of the biological hierarchy is outlined. At the end, some methodological issues are discussed.

Download Full-text

A Whole Genome Re-Sequencing Based GWA Analysis Reveals Candidate Genes Associated with Ivermectin Resistance in Haemonchus contortus

Genes ◽

10.3390/genes11040367 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 11 (4) ◽

pp. 367 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Sawar Khan ◽

Ayesha Nisar ◽

Jianqi Yuan ◽

Xiaoping Luo ◽

Xueqin Dou ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Candidate Genes ◽

Haemonchus Contortus ◽

Population Genomics ◽

Small Ruminants ◽

Track Record ◽

Genome Wide ◽

Signatures Of Selection ◽

Parasitic Worms ◽

Important Parasite

The most important and broad-spectrum drug used to control the parasitic worms to date is ivermectin (IVM). Resistance against IVM has emerged in parasites, and preserving its efficacy is now becoming a serious issue. The parasitic nematode Haemonchus contortus (Rudolphi, 1803) is economically an important parasite of small ruminants across the globe, which has a successful track record in IVM resistance. There are growing evidences regarding the multigenic nature of IVM resistance, and although some genes have been proposed as candidates of IVM resistance using lower magnification of genome, the genetic basis of IVM resistance still remains poorly resolved. Using the full magnification of genome, we herein applied a population genomics approach to characterize genome-wide signatures of selection among pooled worms from two susceptible and six ivermectin-resistant isolates of H. contortus, and revealed candidate genes under selection in relation to IVM resistance. These candidates also included a previously known IVM-resistance-associated candidate gene HCON_00148840, glc-3. Finally, an RNA-interference-based functional validation assay revealed the HCON_00143950 as IVM-tolerance-associated gene in H. contortus. The possible role of this gene in IVM resistance could be detoxification of xenobiotic in phase I of xenobiotic metabolism. The results of this study further enhance our understanding on the IVM resistance and continue to provide further evidence in favor of multigenic nature of IVM resistance.

Download Full-text

Evolutionary and functional genomics of DNA methylation in maize domestication and improvement

Nature Communications ◽

10.1038/s41467-020-19333-4 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Gen Xu ◽

Jing Lyu ◽

Qing Li ◽

Han Liu ◽

Dafang Wang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Dna Methylation ◽

Direct Selection ◽

Whole Genome ◽

Evolutionary Forces ◽

Weak Evidence ◽

Modern Maize ◽

Genome Bisulfite Sequencing ◽

Maize Domestication ◽

Chromatin Feature

Abstract DNA methylation is a ubiquitous chromatin feature, present in 25% of cytosines in the maize genome, but variation and evolution of the methylation landscape during maize domestication remain largely unknown. Here, we leverage whole-genome sequencing (WGS) and whole-genome bisulfite sequencing (WGBS) data on populations of modern maize, landrace, and teosinte (Zea mays ssp. parviglumis) to estimate epimutation rates and selection coefficients. We find weak evidence for direct selection on DNA methylation in any context, but thousands of differentially methylated regions (DMRs) are identified population-wide that are correlated with recent selection. For two trait-associated DMRs, vgt1-DMR and tb1-DMR, HiChIP data indicate that the interactive loops between DMRs and respective downstream genes are present in B73, a modern maize line, but absent in teosinte. Our results enable a better understanding of the evolutionary forces acting on patterns of DNA methylation and suggest a role of methylation variation in adaptive evolution.

Download Full-text

Evolution Makes More Sense in the Light of Development

The American Biology Teacher ◽

10.1525/abt.2014.76.8.2 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 76 (8) ◽

pp. 493-498 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Kostas Kampourakis ◽

Alessandro Minelli

Keyword(s):

Developmental Biology ◽

Evolutionary Biology ◽

Conceptual Development ◽

Evolutionary Developmental Biology ◽

Public Communication ◽

Common Ancestry ◽

Development Research ◽

The Public ◽

Psychological Essentialism ◽

Evo Devo

We highlight some important conceptual issues that biologists should take into account when teaching evolutionary biology or communicating it to the public. We first present conclusions from conceptual development research on how particular human intuitions, namely design teleology and psychological essentialism, influence the understanding of evolution. We argue that these two intuitions form important conceptual obstacles to understanding evolution that should be explicitly addressed during instruction and public communication. Given that a major issue in evolution is understanding how very different forms may share common ancestry – antievolutionists have argued that this is inconceivable – we suggest that evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo), which provides concepts and evidence that large morphological change is possible, could be used to address the intuitions that organisms have fixed essences (psychological essentialism) and that their structure indicates some kind of intentional design (design teleology).

Download Full-text