Developmental and Non-Developmental Morphospaces in Evolutionary Biology

Morphospace studies are rich in pattern and process. Techniques for adequate description and mapping of morphologies have been increasingly refined and applied, the same being true of metrics for relevant parameters (like disparity). However, the testing of process hypotheses for specific patterns of morphospace occupation in time and space is less refined and demands more intensive scrutiny. The polarization of ecological and developmental explanations entails a need to properly tease apart their respective contributions. There are different ways to go about this problem. Here I describe one approach: the isolation of development as a target for testing via the construction of developmental morphospaces. Comparison of differently constructed morphospaces (one reflecting development directly, the other indirectly) provides a way of consistently studying the impact of development in constraining or facilitating changes in diversity. Congruence in range and/or location of "developmental" and "non-developmental" morphospaces, when properly interpreted to account for possible stochastic effects, is powerful evidence for a controlling influence of ontogeny. Appropriate choices involve three kinds of contrasts (with qualifications): theoretical (generative) vs. empirical (descriptive), abnormal (teratological) vs. normal, and juvenile vs. adult morphospaces. Theoretical morphospaces encapsulate logically simple principles of form generation, mimicking the potential simplicity of epigenetic processes. Teratological morphospaces are based on unsuccessful experiments in evolution, but any regularities encountered must reflect internal constraints and opportunities. Juvenile morphospaces are likely to depict a range of pronounced allometries that can serve as raw material for evolution. I provide an extended example of juvenile vs. adult morphospace comparisons with a case study on the evolutionary history of the echinoid order Spatangoida. The broad pathways of morphospace occupation for adults in the order are contrasted with the distribution of juveniles in a developmental morphospace constructed from geometric morphometrics of post-metamorphic specimens. To ensure comparability, the same homologous landmarks are used for adults and juveniles. Disparity between pooled adults and pooled juveniles is compared, and also interpreted in a phylogenetic framework. The distributions of resampled total juvenile and adult disparities are indistinguishable, but there is much dissociation of growth trajectories in morphospace, with many instances of taxonomically heterogeneous juvenile/adult clusters. There are cases of demonstrable association of derived juveniles and primitive adults, pointing to peramorphosis, and of primitive juveniles and derived adults, pointing to paedomorphosis. Instances of clustering of juveniles from different taxa also occur, thus partially supporting Von Baer's second law. Different composite variables, however, suggest no consistent support for VBSL, with cases of similar disparity in juveniles and adults (contra VBSL), of higher disparity in adults (pro VBSL), and of higher disparity in juveniles (contra VBSL). When developmental disparity is mapped on a phylogeny, lack of support for VBSL is again implied: juvenile/adult disparity contrasts based on clade ranks indicate that within subclades juveniles tend to be more variable than adults. There is thus no single vector of change in disparity through ontogeny. Still, all such developmental action potentially driving evolution occurs within a constrained morphospace which is similarly partitioned in ontogenetic and evolutionary time. These results are in disagreement with what can be inferred from vertebrate model systems; their generality should be further explored with analyses of developmental disparity in other invertebrate groups. To appear in Chapman, R. E., Rasskin-Gutman, D. and Wills, M. (eds.): Morphospace Concepts and Applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press (publisher and date of publication to be confirmed).

[1]  Fred L. Bookstein,et al.  Morphometrics in Evolutionary Biology , 1988 .

[2]  M. Foote Morphological and Taxonomic Diversity in Clade's History: The Blastoid Record and Stochastic Simulations , 1991 .

[3]  A. Moore,et al.  A Functional Morphospace, Based on Dimensionless Numbers, for a Circumferential, Calcite, Stabilizing Structure in Sand Dollars , 1993 .

[4]  G. R. McGhee Shell form in the biconvex articulate Brachiopoda: a geometric analysis , 1980, Paleobiology.

[5]  E. Savazzi Theoretical shell morphology as a tool in constructional morphology , 1995 .

[6]  F. Bookstein,et al.  Morphometrics in Evolutionary Biology. , 1986 .

[7]  L. V. Valen,et al.  Multivariate structural statistics in natural history. , 1974 .

[8]  R. D. Thomas,et al.  THE SKELETON SPACE: A FINITE SET OF ORGANIC DESIGNS , 1993, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[9]  D. Wake,et al.  Size and shape in ontogeny and phylogeny , 1979, Paleobiology.

[10]  G. Webster,et al.  Form and transformation , 1996 .

[11]  S. Counce The Strategy of the Genes , 1958, The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine.

[12]  P. Alberch Ontogenesis and Morphological Diversification , 1980 .

[13]  An exercise in rational taxonomy. , 1990, Journal of theoretical biology.

[14]  B. David,et al.  L'ontogenèse complexe du spatangue Echinocardium cordatum: Un test des standards des trajectoires hétérochroniques , 1991 .

[15]  A. C. Fabergé On growth and form. Second edition , 1942 .

[16]  P. Alberch,et al.  Problems with the Interpretation of Developmental Sequences , 1985 .

[17]  P. Wagner Testing evolutionary constraint hypotheses with early Paleozoic gastropods , 1995, Paleobiology.

[18]  R. Levins The strategy of model building in population biology , 1966 .

[19]  O. Ellers A mechanical model of growth in regular sea urchins: predictions of shape and a developmental morphospace , 1993, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[20]  D. McShea MECHANISMS OF LARGE‐SCALE EVOLUTIONARY TRENDS , 1994, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[21]  M. McKinney,et al.  Biodiversity dynamics : turnover of populations, taxa, and communities , 2001 .

[22]  B. Goodwin Temporal organization in cells , 1963 .

[23]  P. Alberch,et al.  The logic of monsters: Evidence for internal constraint in development and evolution , 1989 .

[24]  B. David Jeu en mosaïque des hétérochronies:Variation et diversité chez les Pourtalesiidae (Échinides abyssaux) , 1989 .

[25]  D. Raup Theoretical morphology of echinoid growth , 1968, Journal of Paleontology.

[26]  G. Eble The Role of Development in Evolutionary Radiations , 1998 .

[27]  M. Mckinney Heterochrony in evolution : a multidisciplinary approach , 1988 .

[28]  M. Zelditch,et al.  Heterochrony and heterotopy: stability and innovation in the evolution of form , 1996, Paleobiology.

[29]  N. Rashevsky,et al.  Mathematical biology , 1961, Connecticut medicine.

[30]  C. Hempel Philosophy of Natural Science , 1966 .

[31]  D'arcy W. Thompson On Growth and Form , 1945 .

[32]  David M. Raup,et al.  Geometric analysis of shell coiling; general problems , 1966 .

[33]  M. Foote THE EVOLUTION OF MORPHOLOGICAL DIVERSITY , 1997 .

[34]  G. R. Mcghee,et al.  Theoretical Morphology: The Concept and Its Applications , 1998 .

[35]  M. Foote PERSPECTIVE: EVOLUTIONARY PATTERNS IN THE FOSSIL RECORD , 1996, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[36]  F. Bookstein,et al.  Morphometrics in Evolutionary Biology: The Geometry of Size and Shape Change, With Examples from Fishes , 1985 .

[37]  P. Alberch,et al.  A morphogenetic approach to the origin and basic organization of the tetrapod limb , 1986 .

[38]  P. Ward Comparative shell shape distributions in Jurassic-Cretaceous ammonites and Jurassic-Tertiary nautilids , 1980, Paleobiology.

[39]  B. David Mosaic pattern of heterochronies : variation and diversity in pourtalesiidae (deep-sea echinoids) , 1989 .

[40]  G. Nelson Ontogeny, Phylogeny, Paleontology, and the Biogenetic Law , 1978 .

[41]  L. V. Van Valen Multivariate structural statistics in natural history. , 1974, Journal of theoretical biology.

[42]  Neil Shubin,et al.  EVOLUTION AND MORPHOGENETIC RULES: THE SHAPE OF THE VERTEBRATE LIMB IN ONTOGENY AND PHYLOGENY , 1988, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[43]  J. Dafni A biomechanical model for the morphogenesis of regular echinoid tests , 1986, Paleobiology.

[44]  G. Vermeij Biological versatility and earth history. , 1973, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[45]  R. Swinburne The Argument from Design , 1968 .

[46]  Miriam Leah Zelditch,et al.  ONTOGENY OF INTEGRATED SKULL GROWTH IN THE COTTON RAT SIGMODON FULVIVENTER , 1992, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[47]  G. Eble Contrasting evolutionary flexibility in sister groups: disparity and diversity in Mesozoic atelostomate echinoids , 2000, Paleobiology.

[48]  P. Kier Evolutionary Trends and Their Functional Significance in the Post-Paleozoic Echinoids , 1974, Journal of Paleontology.

[49]  B. Goodwin,et al.  The origin of species: a structuralist approach , 1982 .

[50]  I. Gordon The Development of the Calcareous Test of Echinocardium cordatum , 1927 .

[51]  M. Foote,et al.  Discordance and concordance between morphological and taxonomic diversity , 1993, Paleobiology.

[52]  Kaustuv Roy,et al.  Effects of the Mesozoic Marine Revolution on the taxonomic, morphologic, and biogeographic evolution of a group: aporrhaid gastropods during the Mesozoic , 1994, Paleobiology.

[53]  David M. Raup,et al.  Geometric analysis of shell coiling; coiling in ammonoids , 1967 .

[54]  Ken,et al.  Adaptation of test shape for burrowing and locomotion in spatangoid echinoids , 1992 .

[55]  Great Britain. Foreign Office. Report on the scientific results of the voyage of H.M.S. Challenger during the years 1873-76. Zoology , 1880 .

[56]  W. Arthur,et al.  The Origin of Animal Body Plans , 1997 .

[57]  R. Audi The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy , 1995 .

[58]  B. David,et al.  MORPHOMETRICS AND CLADISTICS: MEASURING PHYLOGENY IN THE SEA URCHIN ECHINOCARDIUM , 1996, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[59]  K. Vogel,et al.  Constructional Morphology and Evolution , 2011, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[60]  A. Seilacher Self-Organizing Mechanisms in Morphogenesis and Evolution , 1991 .

[61]  P. Alberch,et al.  MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION IN THE NEOTROPICAL SALAMANDER GENUS BOLITOGLOSSA , 1983, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[62]  P. Alberch,et al.  Developmental Constraints in Evolutionary Processes , 1982 .

[63]  S. Rice The bio-geometry of mollusc shells , 1998, Paleobiology.

[64]  Brian C. Goodwin,et al.  How the Leopard Changed Its Spots , 1995 .

[65]  J. Murray,et al.  Report on the scientific results of the voyage of H.M.S. Challenger during the years 1873-76. Narrative - Vol. 2 , 1911 .