Molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying the evolution of form and function in the amniote jaw.

The amniote jaw complex is a remarkable amalgamation of derivatives from distinct embryonic cell lineages. During development, the cells in these lineages experience concerted movements, migrations, and signaling interactions that take them from their initial origins to their final destinations and imbue their derivatives with aspects of form including their axial orientation, anatomical identity, size, and shape. Perturbations along the way can produce defects and disease, but also generate the variation necessary for jaw evolution and adaptation. We focus on molecular and cellular mechanisms that regulate form in the amniote jaw complex, and that enable structural and functional integration. Special emphasis is placed on the role of cranial neural crest mesenchyme (NCM) during the species-specific patterning of bone, cartilage, tendon, muscle, and other jaw tissues. We also address the effects of biomechanical forces during jaw development and discuss ways in which certain molecular and cellular responses add adaptive and evolutionary plasticity to jaw morphology. Overall, we highlight how variation in molecular and cellular programs can promote the phenomenal diversity and functional morphology achieved during amniote jaw evolution or lead to the range of jaw defects and disease that affect the human condition

Site pleiotropy of a stickleback Bmp6 enhancer

Development and regeneration are orchestrated by gene regulatory networks that operate in part through transcriptional enhancers. Although many enhancers are pleiotropic and are active in multiple tissues, little is known about whether enhancer pleiotropy is due to 1) site pleiotropy, in which individual transcription factor binding sites (TFBS) are required for activity in multiple tissues, or 2) multiple distinct sites that regulate expression in different tissues. Here, we investigated the pleiotropy of an intronic enhancer of the stickleback Bone morphogenetic protein 6 (Bmp6) gene. This enhancer was previously shown to regulate evolved changes in tooth number and tooth regeneration, and is highly pleiotropic, with robust activity in both fins and teeth throughout embryonic, larval, and adult life, and in the heart and kidney in adult fish. We tested the hypothesis that the pleiotropy of this enhancer is due to site pleiotropy of an evolutionarily conserved predicted Foxc1 TFBS. Transgenic analysis and site-directed mutagenesis experiments both deleting and scrambling this predicted Foxc1 TFBS revealed that the binding site is required for enhancer activity in both teeth and fins throughout embryonic, larval, and adult development, and in the heart and kidney in adult fish. Collectively these data support a model where the pleiotropy of this Bmp6 enhancer is due to site pleiotropy and this putative binding site is required for enhancer activity in multiple anatomical sites from the embryo to the adult

Distinct tooth regeneration systems deploy a conserved battery of genes.

BackgroundVertebrate teeth exhibit a wide range of regenerative systems. Many species, including most mammals, reptiles, and amphibians, form replacement teeth at a histologically distinct location called the successional dental lamina, while other species do not employ such a system. Notably, a 'lamina-less' tooth replacement condition is found in a paraphyletic array of ray-finned fishes, such as stickleback, trout, cod, medaka, and bichir. Furthermore, the position, renewal potential, and latency times appear to vary drastically across different vertebrate tooth regeneration systems. The progenitor cells underlying tooth regeneration thus present highly divergent arrangements and potentials. Given the spectrum of regeneration systems present in vertebrates, it is unclear if morphologically divergent tooth regeneration systems deploy an overlapping battery of genes in their naïve dental tissues.ResultsIn the present work, we aimed to determine whether or not tooth progenitor epithelia could be composed of a conserved cell type between vertebrate dentitions with divergent regeneration systems. To address this question, we compared the pharyngeal tooth regeneration processes in two ray-finned fishes: zebrafish (Danio rerio) and threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). These two teleost species diverged approximately 250 million years ago and demonstrate some stark differences in dental morphology and regeneration. Here, we find that the naïve successional dental lamina in zebrafish expresses a battery of nine genes (bmpr1aa, bmp6, cd34, gli1, igfbp5a, lgr4, lgr6, nfatc1, and pitx2), while active Wnt signaling and Lef1 expression occur during early morphogenesis stages of tooth development. We also find that, despite the absence of a histologically distinct successional dental lamina in stickleback tooth fields, the same battery of nine genes (Bmpr1a, Bmp6, CD34, Gli1, Igfbp5a, Lgr4, Lgr6, Nfatc1, and Pitx2) are expressed in the basalmost endodermal cell layer, which is the region most closely associated with replacement tooth germs. Like zebrafish, stickleback replacement tooth germs additionally express Lef1 and exhibit active Wnt signaling. Thus, two fish systems that either have an organized successional dental lamina (zebrafish) or lack a morphologically distinct successional dental lamina (sticklebacks) deploy similar genetic programs during tooth regeneration.ConclusionsWe propose that the expression domains described here delineate a highly conserved "successional dental epithelium" (SDE). Furthermore, a set of orthologous genes is known to mark hair follicle epithelial stem cells in mice, suggesting that regenerative systems in other epithelial appendages may utilize a related epithelial progenitor cell type, despite the highly derived nature of the resulting functional organs

Distinct tooth regeneration systems deploy a conserved battery of genes.

BackgroundVertebrate teeth exhibit a wide range of regenerative systems. Many species, including most mammals, reptiles, and amphibians, form replacement teeth at a histologically distinct location called the successional dental lamina, while other species do not employ such a system. Notably, a 'lamina-less' tooth replacement condition is found in a paraphyletic array of ray-finned fishes, such as stickleback, trout, cod, medaka, and bichir. Furthermore, the position, renewal potential, and latency times appear to vary drastically across different vertebrate tooth regeneration systems. The progenitor cells underlying tooth regeneration thus present highly divergent arrangements and potentials. Given the spectrum of regeneration systems present in vertebrates, it is unclear if morphologically divergent tooth regeneration systems deploy an overlapping battery of genes in their naïve dental tissues.ResultsIn the present work, we aimed to determine whether or not tooth progenitor epithelia could be composed of a conserved cell type between vertebrate dentitions with divergent regeneration systems. To address this question, we compared the pharyngeal tooth regeneration processes in two ray-finned fishes: zebrafish (Danio rerio) and threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus). These two teleost species diverged approximately 250 million years ago and demonstrate some stark differences in dental morphology and regeneration. Here, we find that the naïve successional dental lamina in zebrafish expresses a battery of nine genes (bmpr1aa, bmp6, cd34, gli1, igfbp5a, lgr4, lgr6, nfatc1, and pitx2), while active Wnt signaling and Lef1 expression occur during early morphogenesis stages of tooth development. We also find that, despite the absence of a histologically distinct successional dental lamina in stickleback tooth fields, the same battery of nine genes (Bmpr1a, Bmp6, CD34, Gli1, Igfbp5a, Lgr4, Lgr6, Nfatc1, and Pitx2) are expressed in the basalmost endodermal cell layer, which is the region most closely associated with replacement tooth germs. Like zebrafish, stickleback replacement tooth germs additionally express Lef1 and exhibit active Wnt signaling. Thus, two fish systems that either have an organized successional dental lamina (zebrafish) or lack a morphologically distinct successional dental lamina (sticklebacks) deploy similar genetic programs during tooth regeneration.ConclusionsWe propose that the expression domains described here delineate a highly conserved "successional dental epithelium" (SDE). Furthermore, a set of orthologous genes is known to mark hair follicle epithelial stem cells in mice, suggesting that regenerative systems in other epithelial appendages may utilize a related epithelial progenitor cell type, despite the highly derived nature of the resulting functional organs

Population Genomics of Variegated Toad-Headed Lizard Phrynocephalus versicolor and Its Adaptation to the Colorful Sand of the Gobi Desert.

The variegated toad-headed agama, Phrynocephalus versicolor, lives in the arid landscape of the Chinese Gobi Desert. We analyzed populations from three different locations which vary in substrate color and altitude: Heishankou (HSK), Guazhou County (GZ), and Ejin Banner (EJN). The substrate color is either light-yellow (GZ-y), yellow (EJN-y), or black (HSK-b); the corresponding lizard population colors largely match their substrate in the degree of melanism. We assembled the P. versicolor genome and sequenced over 90 individuals from the three different populations. Genetic divergence between populations corresponds to their geographic distribution. We inferred the genetic relationships among these populations and used selection scans and differential expression to identify genes that show signatures of selection. Slc2a11 and akap12, among other genes, are highly differentiated and may be responsible for pigment adaptation to substrate color in P. versicolor

The impact of selecting different contrasts in phonological therapy

Previous research indicates that the extent of progress made by children with phonological disorders depends upon the nature of the word pairs contrasted in therapy. For example, phonemes that differ maximally in terms of place, manner, voicing and sound class (e.g., fan - man) in comparison to therapy where the word pairs presented differ minimally (e.g., fan - van). To investigate the implications of target selection within a typical clinical context (as opposed to a rigorous research setting) eight speech-language pathologists implemented intervention with appropriate children from their caseloads. Nineteen children each received 6 hours of therapy over one school term. They were randomly allocated to two groups. One group (of nine children) received intervention based on a traditional minimal pair approach, targeting homonymy as well as distinctive feature contrast. The other group (ten children) received intervention targeting contrasts differing across a range of distinctive features. Children made considerable progress in therapy in terms of speech accuracy and number of error patterns suppressed. However, there was no difference between the progress of the two groups. Follow-up assessment of 14 of the 19 children indicated maintenance of progress by both groups. Reasons for the lack of difference between the groups in the current study are considered and clinical implications are drawn