Developmental constraints in a comparative framework: A test case using variations in phalanx number during amniote evolution
Developmental constraints in a comparative framework: A test case using variations in phalanx number during amniote evolution
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/jez.b.00013
复制
发表时间：
2003-04-15
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
Chipman, AD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Richardson, MK;Chipman, AD
约束是限制进化变革的因素。限制的一个子集是发育性的，并且在胚胎发育期间起作用。关于如何定义发展限制，以及如何将其表述为可检验的假设，存在一些不确定性。此外，概念，如约束打破，普遍的约束，禁止形态提出了一些概念上的困难。我们的目标之一是澄清这些问题。在简要回顾了目前的分类约束，我们定义为那些影响个体发育的形态发生过程的发展限制。它们可能是生成性的，也可能是选择性的，尽管并不总是能作出明确的区分。我们支持这样的想法，即关于约束的陈述实际上是关于特定变换的相对频率的陈述（其中“变换”表示从祖先条件的改变）。一个重要的结果是，同样的转换可能会限制在一个发展或系统发育的背景下，但在另一个进化塑料。在本文中，我们分析了系统发育框架内的发展限制，以前的作者类似的工作。我们的方法是基于以下假设，从文献：（1）约束时，有一个观察到的频率的转换，其预期的频率之间的差异确定;（2）“预期”的分布是通过检查系统发育分布的转换和相关的选择压力。因此，通过寻找这些不同的系统发育分布模式之间的一致性，我们可以测试有关约束的假设。我们批判性地研究这种方法使用的测试案例：变化的phalanx-number中的martoote肢体。(C)2003 Wiley-Liss，Inc.
Constraints are factors that limit evolutionary change. A subset of constraints is developmental, and acts during embryonic development. There is some uncertainty about how to define developmental constraints, and how to formulate them as testable hypotheses. Furthermore, concepts such as constraint-breaking, universal constraints, and forbidden morphologies present some conceptual difficulties. One of our aims is to clarify these issues. After briefly reviewing current classifications of constraint, we define developmental constraints as those affecting morphogenetic processes in ontogeny. They may be generative or selective, although a clear distinction cannot always be drawn. We support the idea that statements about constraints are in fact statements about the relative frequency of particular transformations (where `transformation' indicates a change from the ancestral condition). An important consequence of this is that the same transformation may be constrained in one developmental or phylogenetic context, but evolutionarily plastic in another. In this paper, we analyse developmental constraints within a phylogenetic framework, building on similar work by previous authors. Our approach is based on the following assumptions from the literature: (1) constraints are identified when there is a discrepancy between the observed frequency of a transformation, and its expected frequency; (2) the 'expected' distribution is derived by examining the phylogenetic distribution of the transformation and its associated selection pressures. Thus, by looking for congruence between these various phylogenetic distribution patterns, we can test hypotheses about constraint. We critically examine this approach using a test case: variation in phalanx-number in the amniote limb. (C) 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.