Amphioxus as a Model for Mechanisms in Vertebrate Development

Abstract

For the last two centuries, the cephalochordates, commonly known as lancelets or amphioxus, have been central to investigate the evolutionary genesis of vertebrates. At first, by classical morphologists fascinated by their odd but at the same time familiar anatomical traits and later by molecular biologists giving the first insights into their slow evolving nature. The present data available not only holds amphioxus as an organism of preternatural importance within the tree of life but also boosts its potential to untangle the molecular basis underlying the vertebrate complexity. This is a walk through the past and present of the amphioxus field merging morphological and molecular data in linkage with the fossil record and the modern vertebrates. The resulting picture is drawn together with comparative maps of genome organisation, gastrulation and the origin of the vertebrate organiser, neurulation and the origin of the neural crest, and shared signalling mechanisms between vertebrates and amphioxus during development. Special attention is also given to some of the most critical vertebrate novelties and how the pre‐duplicative amphioxus genetic toolkit might have contributed to set the basis for evolving complexity in the course of vertebrate evolution.

Key Concepts:

  • Cephalochordates occupy at present the key phylogenetic position to get insights into the invertebrate–vertebrate transition and the evolutionary genesis of vertebrates.

  • Whole‐genome duplications in the lineage leading to modern vertebrates might have established the basis for molecular and morphological innovation.

  • The amphioxus genome appears to be the best surrogate available for the ancestral chordate genome regarding the gene content, gene structure and chromosomal organisation.

  • The amphioxus prototypical body plan with respect to vertebrates facilitates the comparative analysis and linkage between invertebrates and vertebrates.

  • The pre‐duplicative genome of amphioxus offers the possibility of analysing vertebrate‐like gene regulatory networks in a simpler biological context with a reduced number of molecular players.

Keywords: vertebrate novelties; neural crest; gastrula organiser; living fossil; macrosynteny; 2R Hypothesis; vertebrate new head; regulatory networks; genetic toolkit; chordate ancestor

Figure 1.

Comparative anatomy of fossils, cephalochordates and vertebrates. (a) Haikouella, (b) Juvenile amphioxus and (c) Amnocoete larva of a lamprey (agnathan vertebrate). Although Haikouella fossils remarkably resemble modern cephalochordates the pharyngeal denticles (where indicated) approaches them to vertebrates. Although in Haikouella and the ammocoete lamprey larva the eyes are paired, the so‐called frontal eye in amphioxus is unique and medially located. After Mallatt and Chen and Holland et al..

Figure 2.

Schematic representation of macrosynteny between the B. floridae and the human genome. The 17 CLGs identified in the B. floridae genome are represented in (a). The gene content and organisation is in most of the cases clearly conserved between B. floridae and the human genome, allowing the identification of the duplicated genes in their chromosomal context after the genome doublings (2R) that took place during vertebrate evolution. Such conservation permits to recognise gene losses or chromosomal reorganisations, amongst other genomic events. The example given in (b) shows the loss of the gene of interest (red) in one of the human chromosomes (5), the loss of a surrounding gene (blue) in another human chromosome (20) and different arrangements of the paralogous regions, including a local reorganisation of the surrounding genes (see tandem in pink, orange and blue) in chromosome 12. The ordering of surrounding genes (pink, orange, blue, yellow and green) is also an example of microsynteny.

Figure 3.

Phylogenetic relationship between vertebrate an invertebrate chordates. (a) Old phyogeny and (b) new phylogeny after Delsuc and collaborators. Although the first molecular phylogenies located amphioxus as the sister group of vertebrates (a), the more recent analyses of bigger sets of genomic data place amphioxus in the pivotal position at the root of all chordates. Such position is, in addition, more consistent with the presence of neural crest‐like (NC‐Like) cells and a mid–hindbrain (MH) boundary in urochordates, still undemonstrated in cephalochordates.

Figure 4.

Comparative representation of the gastrula organiser in vertebrates and amphioxus. (a) Late gastrula of amphibians and (b) late gastrula of amphioxus. In both cases the vegetal pole is the initial point of invagination, where the blastopore will remain open. Such opening generates the ventral and dorsal blastopore lips, the latter containing the organiser region (Speman's organiser in amphibians). Despite differences in the mode of gastrulation, amphibians and amphioxus share an organiser region with a same embryonic origin and a same genetic code, suggesting a common role in A/P and D/V patterning. DL: dorsal lip; VL: ventral lip; B: blastopore. Based on references Yu et al. and Holland and Holland .

Figure 5.

Commonalities of Hox regulation between vertebrates and amphioxus. The model represents the collinear‐nested expression of different Hox genes (HN) delimited by signalling pathways such as those of the retinoic acid (RA) (pink), Cdx (sky blue) and Fgfs (arrows), in both vertebrates (a) and amphioxus (b). Graded pink represents the RA gradient, with a rostral limit coincident with the most anterior Hox expression and a caudal limit partially overlapped with Cdx expression. Within the presomitic mesoderm (PSM) opposing RA gradients and Fgf/Wnt gradients (grape colour arrows) meet to generate the determination front, from where new somites will bud, as it is known in vertebrates. In the anterior region, Fgf signalling represses the RA front generating a Hox free region devoid of segmentation. CV: cerebral vesicle; S: somite; PEN: Prosencephalon; MEN: Mesencephalon; REN: Rombencephalon; R: Rombomere. Based on references Schubert et al., Dequeant and Pourquie , Garcia‐Fernàndez et al. and H. Escrivà (personal communication).

Figure 6.

Territorial differences and common molecular players during the formation of the neural tube in vertebrates and amphioxus. (a) Cross‐section of a consensus vertebrate in neurula stage and (b) cross‐section of an amphioxus neurula. The major difference lies on the neural crest territory at the edges of the neural plate (light yellow). In vertebrates (a) the neural crest territory is separating the nonneural (E) from the neural ectoderm (NP), whereas in amphioxus (b) the nonneural ectoderm (E) simply closes over the neural ectoderm (NP) (light yellow territory is represented where it conceptually should be located). Although the molecular machinery to set the neural crest borders is common between amphioxus and vertebrates, only one neural crest specifier, Snail, is equally restricted in the equivalent region in amphioxus. The notochord underlying the neural plate has been removed for clarity. E: epidermis; PM: Paraxial Mesoderm; NP: neural plate; NT: neural tube. Based on references Holland and Yu et al..

close

References

Benito‐Gutiérrez E (2006) A gene catalogue of the amphioxus nervous system. International Journal of Biological Sciences 2: 149–160.

Benito‐Gutiérrez E, Nake C, Llovera M, Comella JX and Garcia‐Fernàndez J (2005) The single AmphiTrk receptor highlights increased complexity of neurotrophin signalling in vertebrates and suggests an early role in developing sensory neuroepidermal cells. Development 132: 2191–2202.

Boorman CJ and Shimeld SM (2002) Pitx homeobox genes in Ciona and amphioxus show left–right asymmetry is a conserved chordate character and define the ascidian adenohypophysis. Evolution and Development 4: 354–365.

Breidbacha O and Ghiselinb MT (2007) Anton Dohrn and the problems of 19th century. Theory in Biosciences 125: 173–179.

Brooke NM, Garcia‐Fernàndez J and Holland PW (1998) The ParaHox gene cluster is an evolutionary sister of the Hox gene cluster. Nature 392: 920–922.

Chen JY, Dzik J, Edgecombe GD, Ramsköld L and Zhou GK (1995) A possible Early Cambrian chordate. Nature 377: 720–722.

Conway Morris S and Whittington HB (1979) The animals of Burgués Shale. Scientific American 240: 122–133.

Costa OG (1834) In Cenni zoologici, ossia descrizione sommaria delle specie nuove di animali discoperti in diverse coutrade del regno nell’ anno. Napoli, Azzolino, pp 49–50.

Darwin C (1859) On the Origin of the Species. London: John Murray.

Delsuc F, Brinkmann H, Chourrout D and Philippe H (2006) Tunicates and not cephalochordates are the closest living relatives of vertebrates. Nature 439: 965–968.

Dequéant ML and Pourquié O (2008) Segmental patterning of the vertebrate embryonic axis. Nature 9: 370–382.

Disk J (1995) Yunnanozoon and the ancestry of chordates. Acta Paleontologica Polonica 40: 341–360.

Ferguson‐Smith M (2007) The evolution of sex chromosomes and sex determination in vertebrates and the key role of DMRT1. Sexual Development 1: 2–11.

Garcia‐Fernàndez J (2005) The genesis and evolution of homeobox gene clusters. Nature Review Genetics 6: 881–892.

Garcia‐Fernández J and Holland PW (1994) Archetypal organization of the amphioxus Hox gene cluster. Nature 370: 563–566.

Garcia‐Fernàndez J, Jiménez‐Delgado S, Pascual‐Anaya J et al. (2009) From the American to the European amphioxus: towards experimental Evo‐Devo at the origin of chordates. International Journal of Developmental Biology 53: 1359–1366.

Gellon G and McGinnis W (1998) Shaping animal body plans in development and evolution by modulation of Hox expression patterns. BioEssays 20: 116–125.

Glardon S, Holland LZ, Gehring WJ and Holland ND (1998) Isolation and developmental expression of the amphioxus Pax‐6 gene (AmphiPax‐6): insights into eye and photoreceptor evolution. Development 125: 2701–2710.

Holland LZ (2006) A SINE in the genome of the cephalochordate amphioxus is an Alu element. International Journal of Biological Sciences 2: 61–65.

Holland LZ (2009) Chordate roots of the vertebrate nervous system: expanding the molecular toolkit. Nature Review Neuroscience 10: 736–746.

Holland LZ and Holland ND (2001) Evolution of neural crest and placodes: amphioxus as a model for the ancestral vertebrate? Journal of Anatomy 199: 85–98.

Holland LZ and Holland ND (2007) A revised map for amphioxus and the evolution of axial patterning in chordates. Integrative and Comparative Biology 47: 360–372.

Holland LZ, Laudet V and Schubert M (2004) The chordate amphioxus: an emerging model organism for developmental biology. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences 61: 2290–2308.

Holland LZ and Short S (2008) Gene duplication, co‐option and recruitment during the origin of the vertebrate brain from the invertebrate chordate brain. Brain Behavior and Evolution 72: 91–105.

Holland ND, Holland LZ and Kozmik Z (1995a) An amphioxus Pax gene, AmphiPax‐1, expressed in embryonic endoderm, but not in mesoderm: implications for the evolution of class I paired box genes. Molecular Marine Biology and Biotechnology 4: 206–214.

Holland ND, Venkatesh TV, Holland LZ, Jacobs DK and Bodmer R (2003) AmphiNk2‐tin, an amphioxus homeobox gene expressed in myocardial progenitors: insights into evolution of the vertebrate heart. Developmental Biology 255: 128–137.

Holland PW, Holland LZ, Williams NA and Holland ND (1992) An amphioxus homeobox gene: sequence conservation, spatial expression during development and insights into vertebrate evolution. Development 116: 653–661.

Holland PW, Koschorz B, Holland LZ and Herrmann BG (1995b) Conservation of Brachyury (T) genes in amphioxus and vertebrates: developmental and evolutionary implications. Development 121: 4283–4291.

Jeffery WR (2006) Ascidian neural crest‐like cells: phylogenetic distribution, relationship to larval complexity, and pigmented cell fate. Journal of Experimental Zoology B Molecular Development 306B: 470–480.

Kaltenbach SL, Yu JK and Holland ND (2009) The origin and migration of the earliest‐developing sensory neurons in the peripheral nervous system of amphioxus. Evolution and Development 11: 142–151.

Kozmik Z, Holland ND, Kalousova A et al. (1999) Characterization of an amphioxus paired box gene, AmphiPax2/5/8: developmental expression patterns in optic support cells, nephridium, thyroid‐like structures and pharyngeal gill slits, but not in the midbrain–hindbrain boundary region. Development 126: 1295–1304.

Lacalli TC (2005) Protochordate body plan and the evolutionary role of larvae: old controversies resolved? Canadian Journal of Zoology 83: 216–224.

Lemaire P, Smith WC and Nishida H (2008) Ascidians and the plasticity of the chordate developmental program. Current Opinion in Biology 22: R620–R631.

Mallatt J and Chen JY (2003) Fossil sister group of craniates: predicted and found. Journal of Morphology 258: 1–31.

Minguillón C and Garcia‐Fernàndez J (2002) The single amphioxus Mox gene: insights into the functional evolution of Mox genes, somites, and the asymmetry of amphioxus somitogenesis. Developmental Biology 246: 455–465.

Minguillón C, Jiménez‐Delgado S, Panopoulou G and Garcia‐Fernàndez J (2003) The amphioxus Hairy family: differential fate after duplication. Development 130: 5903–5914.

Northcutt RG (2005) The new head hypothesis revisited Journal of Experimental Zoology B Molecular Development and Evolution 304: 274–297.

Pallas PS (1774) Spicilegia Zoologica Quibus Novae Imprimis et ObscuraeAnimalium Specie Iconibus, Descriptionibus atque Commentariis Illustrantur. Berlin, Berolini and Stralsund: Gottlieb August Lange, p 19.

Peres JN and Durston AJ (2006) Role of X‐Delta‐2 in the early neural development of Xenopus laevis. Developmental Dynamics 235: 802–810.

Putnam NH, Butts T, Ferrier DE et al. (2008) The amphioxus genome and the evolution of the chordate karyotype. Nature 453: 1064–1071.

Rasmussen SL, Holland LZ, Schubert M, Beaster‐Jones L and Holland ND (2007) Amphioxus AmphiDelta: evolution of Delta protein structure, segmentation, and neurogenesis. Genesis 45: 113–122.

Schubert M, Holland ND, Escriva H, Holland LZ and Laudet V (2004) Retinoic acid influences anteroposterior positioning of epidermal sensory neurons and their gene expression in a developing chordate (amphioxus). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 101: 10320–10325.

Schubert M, Holland ND, Laudet V and Holland LZ (2006) A retinoic acid‐Hox hierarchy controls both anterior/posterior patterning and neuronal specification in the developing central nervous system of the cephalochordate amphioxus. Developmental Biology 296: 190–202.

Schubert M, Meulemans D, Bronner‐Fraser M, Holland LZ and Holland ND (2003) Differential mesodermal expression of two amphioxus MyoD family members (AmphiMRF1 and AmphiMRF2). Gene Expression Patterns 3: 199–202.

Schubert M, Yu JK, Holland ND et al. (2005) Retinoic acid signaling acts via Hox1 to establish the posterior limit of the pharynx in the chordate amphioxus. Development 132: 61–73.

Shimeld SM (1997) Characterisation of amphioxus HNF‐3 genes: conserved expression in the notochord and floor plate. Developmental Biology 183: 74–85.

Shimeld SM and Holland ND (2005) Amphioxus molecular biology: insights into vertebrate evolution and developmental mechanisms. Canadian Journal of Zoology 83: 90–100.

Shu D, Zhang X and Chen L (1996a) Reinterpretation of Yunnanozoon as the earliest known hemichordate. Nature 380: 428–430.

Shu DG, Conway Morris S and Zhang XL (1996b) A Pikaia‐like chordate from the Lower Cambrian of China. Nature 384: 157–158.

Stach T (1999) The ontogeny of the notochord of Branchiostoma lanceolatum. Acta Zoologica 80: 25–33.

Wada H, Garcia‐Fernàndez J and Holland PW (1999) Colinear and segmental expression of amphioxus Hox genes. Developmental Biology 213: 131–141.

Wang Y, Zhang PJ, Yasui K and Saiga H (2002) Expression of Bblhx3, a LIM‐homeobox gene, in the development of amphioxus Branchiostoma belcheri tsingtauense. Mechanisms of Development 117: 315–319.

Whittaker JR (1997) Cephalochordates, the lancelets. In: Gilbert SF and Raunio AM (eds), Embryology: Constructing the Organism, pp 365–381.

Yu JK, Meulemans D, McKeown SJ et al. (2009) Insights from the amphioxus genome on the origin of vertebrate neural crest. Genome Research 18: 1127–1132.

Yu JK, Satou Y, Holland ND et al. (2007) Axial patterning in cephalochordates and the evolution of the organizer. Nature 445: 613–617.

Further Reading

Graham A (1999) The development and evolution of the pharyngeal arches. Journal of Anatomy 133–141.

Holland LZ, Albalat R, Azumi K et al. (2008) The amphioxus genome illuminates vertebrate origins and cephalochordate biology. Genome Research 18: 1100–1111.

Mazet F and Shimeld SM (2002) Gene duplication and divergence in the early evolution of vertebrates. Current Opinion in Genetics and Development 12: 393–396.

Nielsen C (2001) Animal Evolution: Interrelationships of the Living Phyla. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Poss SG and Boschung HT (1996) Lancelets (cephalochordata:branchiostomidae): how many species are valid? Israel Journal of Zoology 42: S13–66.

Schlosser G (2008) Do vertebrate neural crest and cranial placodes have a common evolutionary origin? BioEssays 30: 659–672.

Stern C (2004) Gastrulation. Cold Spring Harbor, New York: Laboratory Press.

Yu JK (2010) The evolutionary origin of the vertebrate neural crest and its developmental gene regulatory network – insights from amphioxus. Zoology (Jena) 113: 1–9.

Contact Editor close
Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

How to Cite close
Benito‐Gutiérrez, Èlia(Jun 2011) Amphioxus as a Model for Mechanisms in Vertebrate Development. In: eLS. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester. http://www.els.net [doi: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0021773]