Body Plan Identity: A Mechanistic Model

Modularity, homology, heterochrony: Gavin de Beer's legacy to the mammalian skull

Modularity (segmentation), homology and heterochrony were essential concepts embraced by Gavin de Beer in his studies of the development and evolution of the vertebrate skull. While his pioneering contributions have stood the test of time, our understanding of the biological processes that underlie each concept has evolved. We assess de Beer's initial training as an experimental embryologist; his switch to comparative and descriptive studies of skulls, jaws and middle ear ossicles; and his later research on the mammalian skull, including his approach to head segmentation. The role of cells of neural crest and mesodermal origin in skull development, and developmental, palaeontological and molecular evidence for the origin of middle ear ossicles in the evolutionary transition from reptiles to mammals are used to illustrate our current understanding of modularity, homology and heterochrony. This article is part of the theme issue 'The mammalian skull: development, structure and function'.

Evolution of homology: From archetype towards a holistic concept of cell type

The concept of homology lies in the heart of comparative biological science. The distinction between homology as structure and analogy as function has shaped the evolutionary paradigm for a century and formed the axis of comparative anatomy and embryology, which accept the identity of structure as a ground measure of relatedness. The advent of single-cell genomics overturned the classical view of cell homology by establishing a backbone regulatory identity of cell types, the basic biological units bridging the molecular and phenotypic dimensions, to reveal that the cell is the most flexible unit of living matter and that many approaches of classical biology need to be revised to understand evolution and diversity at the cellular level. The emerging theory of cell types explicitly decouples cell identity from phenotype, essentially allowing for the divergence of evolutionarily related morphotypes beyond recognition, as well as it decouples ontogenetic cell lineage from cell-type phylogeny, whereby explicating that cell types can share common descent regardless of their structure, function or developmental origin. The article succinctly summarizes current progress and opinion in this field and formulates a more generalistic view of biological cell types as avatars, transient or terminal cell states deployed in a continuum of states by the developmental programme of one and the same omnipotent cell, capable of changing or combining identities with distinct evolutionary histories or inventing ad hoc identities that never existed in evolution or development. It highlights how the new logic grounded in the regulatory nature of cell identity transforms the concepts of cell homology and phenotypic stability, suggesting that cellular evolution is inherently and massively network-like, with one-to-one homologies being rather uncommon and restricted to shallower levels of the animal tree of life.

The hierarchical basis of serial homology and evolutionary novelty

Given the pervasiveness of gene sharing in evolution and the extent of homology across the tree of life, why is everything not homologous with everything else? The continuity and overlapping genetic contributions to diverse traits across lineages seem to imply that no discrete determination of homology is possible. Although some argue that the widespread overlap in parts and processes should be acknowledged as "partial" homology, this threatens a broad base of presumed comparative morphological knowledge accepted by most biologists. Following a long scientific tradition, we advocate a strategy of "theoretical articulation" that introduces further distinctions to existing concepts to produce increased contrastive resolution among the labels used to represent biological phenomena. We pursue this strategy by drawing on successful patterns of reasoning from serial homology at the level of gene sequences to generate an enriched characterization of serial homology as a hierarchical, phylogenetic concept. Specifically, we propose that the concept of serial homology should be applied primarily to repeated but developmentally individualized body parts, such as cell types, differentiated body segments, or epidermal appendages. For these characters, a phylogenetic history can be reconstructed, similar to families of paralogous genes, endowing the notion of serial homology with a hierarchical, phylogenetic interpretation. On this basis, we propose a five-fold theoretical classification that permits a more fine-grained mapping of diverse trait-types. This facilitates answering the question of why everything is not homologous with everything else, as well as how novelty is possible given that any new character possesses evolutionary precursors. We illustrate the fecundity of our account by reference to debates over insect wing serial homologs and vertebrate paired appendages.

Serial Homology and Segment Identity in the Arthropod Head

The anterior-most unit of the crown-group arthropod body plan includes three segments, the pre-gnathal segments, that contain three neuromeres that together comprise the brain. Recent work on the development of this anterior region has shown that its three units exhibit many developmental differences to the more posterior segments, to the extent that they should not be considered serial homologs. Building on this revised understanding of the development of the pre-gnathal segments, we suggest a novel scenario for arthropod head evolution. We posit an expansion of an ancestral single-segmented head at the transition from Radiodonta to Deuteropoda in the arthropod stem group. The expanded head subdivided into three segmental units, each maintaining some of the structures of the ancestral head. This scenario is consistent with what we know of head evolution from the fossil record and helps reconcile some of the debates about early arthropod evolution.

Reframing research on evolutionary novelty and co-option: Character identity mechanisms versus deep homology

A central topic in research at the intersection of development and evolution is the origin of novel traits. Despite progress on understanding how developmental mechanisms underlie patterns of diversity in the history of life, the problem of novelty continues to challenge researchers. Here we argue that research on evolutionary novelty and the closely associated phenomenon of co-option can be reframed fruitfully by: (1) specifying a conceptual model of mechanisms that underwrite character identity, (2) providing a richer and more empirically precise notion of co-option that goes beyond common appeals to "deep homology", and (3) attending to the nature of experimental interventions that can determine whether and how the co-option of identity mechanisms can help to explain novel character origins. This reframing has the potential to channel future investigation to make substantive progress on the problem of evolutionary novelty. To illustrate this potential, we apply our reframing to two case studies: treehopper helmets and beetle horns.