The segment polarity network is a robust developmental module

All insects possess homologous segments, but segment specification differs radically among insect orders. In Drosophila, maternal morphogens control the patterned activation of gap genes, which encode transcriptional regulators that shape the patterned expression of pair-rule genes. This patterning cascade takes place before cellularization. Pair-rule gene products subsequently ‘imprint’ segment polarity genes with reiterated patterns, thus defining the primordial segments. This mechanism must be greatly modified in insect groups in which many segments emerge only after cellularization. In beetles and parasitic wasps, for instance, pair-rule homologues are expressed in patterns consistent with roles during segmentation, but these patterns emerge within cellular fields. In contrast, although in locusts pair-rule homologues may not control segmentation, some segment polarity genes and their interactions are conserved. Perhaps segmentation is modular, with each module autonomously expressing a characteristic intrinsic behaviour in response to transient stimuli. If so, evolution could rearrange inputs to modules without changing their intrinsic behaviours. Here we suggest, using computer simulations, that the Drosophila segment polarity genes constitute such a module, and that this module is resistant to variations in the kinetic constants that govern its behaviour.

[1]  Snezana Lawrence.  October , 1855, The Hospital.

[2]  Hilla Peretz,et al.  Ju n 20 03 Schrödinger ’ s Cat : The rules of engagement , 2003 .

[3]  J. M. W. Slack,et al.  From Egg to Embryo , 1983 .

[4]  M. Andersson.  EVOLUTION OF CONDITION‐DEPENDENT SEX ORNAMENTS AND MATING PREFERENCES: SEXUAL SELECTION BASED ON VIABILITY DIFFERENCES , 1986, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[5]  Andrew Pomiankowski,et al.  Sexual selection: the handicap principle does work – sometimes , 1987, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences.

[6]  M. Akam,et al.  The molecular basis for metameric pattern in the Drosophila embryo. , 1987, Development.

[7]  P. Ingham,et al.  Regulation of segment polarity genes in the Drosophila blastoderm by fushi tarazu and even skipped , 1988, Nature.

[8]  N E Baker,et al.  Role of segment polarity genes in the definition and maintenance of cell states in the Drosophila embryo. , 1988, Development.

[9]  Judith A. Kassis,et al.  Two-tiered regulation of spatially patterned engrailed gene expression during Drosophila embryogenesis , 1988, Nature.

[10]  N. Patel,et al.  Expression of engrailed during segmentation in grasshopper and crayfish. , 1989, Development.

[11]  A. Grafen.  Biological signals as handicaps. , 1990, Journal of theoretical biology.

[12]  Stuart A. Kauffman,et al.  The origins of order , 1993 .

[13]  P. O’Farrell,et al.  Multiple modes of engrailed regulation in the progression towards cell fate determination , 1991, Nature.

[14]  T. Tabata,et al.  The Drosophila hedgehog gene is expressed specifically in posterior compartment cells and is a target of engrailed regulation. , 1992, Genes & development.

[15]  Nipam H. Patel,et al.  Changing role of even-skipped during the evolution of insect pattern formation , 1992, Nature.

[16]  G. Hill.  Proximate basis of variation in carotenoid pigmentation in male house finches , 1992 .

[17]  N. Patel.  The evolution of arthropod segmentation: insights from comparisons of gene expression patterns. , 1994, Development (Cambridge, England). Supplement.

[18]  Susan J. Brown,et al.  The beetle Tribolium castaneum has a fushi tarazu homolog expressed in stripes during segmentation. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  P. Lawrence,et al.  Drosophila wingless sustains engrailed expression only in adjoining cells: Evidence from mosaic embryos , 1994, Cell.

[20]  J. Hooper.  Distinct pathways for autocrine and paracrine Wingless signalling inDrosophila embryos , 1994, Nature.

[21]  G. Wilkinson,et al.  Female choice response to artificial selection on an exaggerated male trait in a stalk-eyed fly , 1994, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[22]  Susan J. Brown,et al.  Embryonic expression of the single Tribolium engrailed homolog. , 1994, Developmental genetics.

[23]  F. Falciani,et al.  Dax, a locust Hox gene related to fushi-tarazu but showing no pair-rule expression. , 1994, Development.

[24]  S. Carroll,et al.  Conservation of wingless patterning functions in the short-germ embryos of Tribolium castaneum , 1994, Nature.

[25]  P. O’Farrell,et al.  The making of a maggot: patterning the Drosophila embryonic epidermis. , 1994, Current opinion in genetics & development.

[26]  L. Gustafsson,et al.  Trade-offs between life-history traits and a secondary sexual character in male collared flycatchers , 1995, Nature.

[27]  T. Kornberg,et al.  Analysis of cubitus interruptus regulation in Drosophila embryos and imaginal disks. , 1995, Development.

[28]  G. Struhl,et al.  Dual Roles for Patched in Sequestering and Transducing Hedgehog , 1996, Cell.

[29]  S. Carroll,et al.  Polyembryonic development: insect pattern formation in a cellularized environment. , 1996, Development.

[30]  P. Ingham,et al.  Transcriptional activation of hedgehog target genes in Drosophila is mediated directly by the cubitus interruptus protein, a member of the GLI family of zinc finger DNA-binding proteins. , 1996, Genes & development.

[31]  L. Rowe,et al.  The lek paradox and the capture of genetic variance by condition dependent traits , 1996, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[32]  Konrad Basler,et al.  Sending and Receiving the Hedgehog Signal: Control by the Drosophila Gli Protein Cubitus interruptus , 1996, Science.

[33]  J. Helden,et al.  Establishement of the dorso-ventral pattern during embryonic development of drosophila melanogasater: a logical analysis , 1997, Journal of theoretical biology.

[34]  L. Simmons,et al.  Patterns of fluctuating asymmetry in beetle horns: an experimental examination of the honest signalling hypothesis , 1997, Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology.

[35]  S. Leibler,et al.  Robustness in simple biochemical networks , 1997, Nature.

[36]  Susan J. Brown,et al.  Molecular characterization and embryonic expression of the even-skipped ortholog of Tribolium castaneum , 1997, Mechanisms of Development.

[37]  T. Kornberg,et al.  Proteolysis That Is Inhibited by Hedgehog Targets Cubitus interruptus Protein to the Nucleus and Converts It to a Repressor , 1997, Cell.

[38]  R. Nusse,et al.  Hedgehog signaling regulates transcription through cubitus interruptus, a sequence-specific DNA binding protein. , 1997, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[39]  P. David,et al.  Male sexual ornament size but not asymmetry reflects condition in stalk–eyed flies , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[40]  N. Patel,et al.  Functional conservation of the wingless–engrailed interaction as shown by a widely applicable baculovirus misexpression system , 1999, Current Biology.

[41]  M. Taper,et al.  Evolution of genetic variation for condition-dependent traits in stalk-eyed flies , 1999, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[42]  A. Qvarnström.  GENOTYPE‐BY‐ENVIRONMENT INTERACTIONS IN THE DETERMINATION OF THE SIZE OF A SECONDARY SEXUAL CHARACTER IN THE COLLARED FLYCATCHER (FICEDULA ALBICOLLIS) , 1999, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[43]  I. Owens,et al.  Environmental determination of a sexually selected trait , 1999, Nature.

[44]  D. Bray,et al.  A free-energy-based stochastic simulation of the Tar receptor complex. , 1999, Journal of molecular biology.

[45]  D. Stainier,et al.  A sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor regulates cell migration during vertebrate heart development , 2000, Nature.