Advertisement

Development Genes and Evolution

, Volume 216, Issue 7–8, pp 451–465 | Cite as

The ten Hox genes of the millipede Glomeris marginata

  • Ralf Janssen
  • Wim G. M. Damen
Original Article

Abstract

We have isolated the ten Hox genes from the pill millipede Glomeris marginata (Myriapoda:Diplopoda). All ten genes are expressed in characteristic Hox-gene-like expression patterns. The register of Hox gene expression borders is conserved and the expression profiles show that the anterior-most limb-bearing segment in arthropods (antennal/cheliceral segment) does not express any Hox gene, while the next segment (intercalary/second-antennal/premandibular/pedipalpal segment) does express Hox genes. The Hox expression patterns in this millipede thus support the conclusion that all arthropods possess a deuterocerebral segment. We find that there is an apparent posterior shift of Hox gene expression domains dorsally relative to their ventral patterns, indicating that the decoupling of dorsal and ventral segmentation is not restricted to the level of segment polarity genes but apparently includes the Hox genes. Although the mechanism for the decoupling of dorsal and ventral segmentation remains unsolved, the decoupling must be at a level higher in the hierarchy than that of the segment polarity and Hox genes. The expression patterns of Ultrabithorax and abdominal-A suggest a correlation between the function of these genes and the delayed outgrowth of posterior trunk appendages. This delay may be caused by an assumed repressor function of Ultrabithorax, which might partially repress the activation of the Distal-less gene. The Glomeris fushi tarazu gene is expressed in a Hox-like domain and in the developing central nervous system, but not in segmental stripes such as has been reported in another myriapod species, the centipede Lithobius. In contrast to the Lithobius fushi tarazu gene, there is no indication for a role in segment formation for the millipede fushi tarazu gene, suggesting that fushi tarazu first acquired its segmentation function in the lineage of the insects.

Keywords

Segmentation Diplopod Myriapod Axis formation Labial Proboscipedia Hox3 Deformed Sex combs reduced Fushi tarazu Antennapedia Ultrabithorax Abdominal-A Abdominal-B 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Jean Deutsch and Michel Veuille for the invitation to communicate our work on the Development and Phylogeny of Arthropods meeting in Paris (France) from September 23–24, 2005, and for the opportunity of publication in this journal. We thank Diethard Tautz for his continuous support of our work and Nikola-Michael Prpic for many discussions and critical reading of the manuscript. We also thank Hilary Dove for providing the Glomeris rapid amplification of cDNA ends template. This work was supported in part by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft via Sonderforschungsbereich 572 of the University of Cologne and by the European Union via the Marie Curie Research and Training Network ZOONET (MRTN-CT-2004-005624).

Supplementary material

427_2006_92_MOESM1_ESM.gif (359 kb)
Fig. S1

Glomeris Hox gene sequences. a The partial homeodomain including the C-terminal flanking region of the G. marginata genes is aligned to other Hox gene orthologs of various arthropods, including the fruit fly D. melanogaster (Dm), the spider Cupiennius salei (Cs), and the centipede L. atkinsoni (La). Asterisks above the sequence indicate conserved amino acid positions. The lower case letters (elekef) in some of the Glomeris and Lithobius sequences indicate that these amino acids (aa) are derived from the primer sequences. A bold asterisk at the end of a sequence indicates the position of the stop codon, dots indicate that there are more sequences that are not included in the alignment. The dash (-) in the Gm-Abd-B sequence represents a gap that has been introduced to get a better alignment. b The complete homeodomain including the N-terminal flanking region of the G. marginata ftz gene is aligned to other ftz gene orthologs of other arthropods, a tardigrate, and an onychophoran. Conserved aa of the hexapeptide motif (YPWM) are highlighted in green, conserved aa of the YxD domain located between hexapeptide and homeodomain are shown in blue. Diagnostic aa within the homeodomain are highlighted in red. The dashes (-) represent gaps that have been introduced to get a better alignment. Aligned are the ftz sequences of the species as in a, and in addition, sequences of the centipede Ethmostigmus rubripes (Er), the mite Archegozetes longisetosus (Al), the cirripede Sacculina carcini (Sc), the beetle Tribolium castaneum (Tc), the grasshopper Schistocerca gregaria (Sg) (all arthropods), the onychophoran Acanthokara kaputensis (Ak), and the tardigrade Milnesium tardigradum (Mt) (GIF 11 kb)

References

  1. Abzhanov A, Kaufman TC (1999) Homeotic genes and the arthropod head: Expression patterns of the labial, proboscipedia, and Deformed genes in crustaceans and insects. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:10224–10229PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abzhanov A, Kaufman TC (2000a) Crustacean (malacostracan) Hox genes and the evolution of the arthropod trunk. Development 127:2239–2249PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Abzhanov A, Kaufman TC (2000b) Embryonic expression patterns of the Hox genes of the crayfish Procambarus clarkii (Crustacea, Decapoda). Evol Dev 2:271–283PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abzhanov A, Popadic A, Kaufman TC (1999) Chelicerate Hox genes and the homology of arthropod segments. Evol Dev 1:77–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Averof M, Akam M (1995) Hox genes and the diversification of the insect and crustacean body plans. Nature 376:420–423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Averof M, Patel NH (1997) Crustacean appendage evolution associated with changes in Hox gene expression. Nature 388:682–686PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brown SJ, Fellers JP, Shippy TD, Richardson EA, Maxwell M, Stuart JJ, Denell RE (2002) Sequence of the Tribolium castaneum homeotic complex. The region corresponding to the Drosophila melanogaster Antennapedia complex. Genetics 160:1067–1074PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Carroll SB (1995) Homeotic genes and the evolution of arthropods and chordates. Nature 376:479–485PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carroll SB, Scott MP (1985) Localization of the fushi tarazu protein during Drosophila embryogenesis. Cell 43:47–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Damen WGM (2002) fushi tarazu: a Hox gene changes its role. Bioessays 24:992–995PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Damen WGM, Tautz D (1998) A hox class 3 orthologue from the spider Cupiennius salei is expressed in a Hox-gene-like fashion. Dev Genes Evol 208:586–590PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Damen WGM, Tautz D (1999a) Comparative molecular embryology of arthropods: the expression of Hox genes in the spider Cupiennius salei. Invertebr Reprod Dev 36:203–209Google Scholar
  13. Damen WGM, Tautz D (1999b) Abdominal-B expression in a spider suggests a general role for Abdominal-B in specifying the genital structure. J Exp Zool 285:85–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Damen WGM, Hausdorf M, Seyfarth E-A, Tautz D (1998) A conserved mode of head segmentation in arthropods revealed by the expression pattern of Hox genes in a spider. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:10665–10670PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Damen WGM, Janssen R, Prpic N-M (2005) Pair rule gene orthologs in spider segmentation. Evol Dev 7:618–628PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Denell RE, Hummels KR, Wakimoto BT, Kaufman TC (1981) Developmental studies of lethality associated with the Antennapedia gene complex in Drosophila melanogaster. Dev Biol 81:43–50PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dohle W (1964) Die Embryonalentwicklung von Glomeris marginata (Villers) im Vergleich zur Entwicklung anderer Diplopoden. Zool Jb Anat 81:241–310Google Scholar
  18. Dohle W (1974) The segmentation of the germ band of Diplopoda compared with other classes of arthropods. Symp Zool Soc Lond 32:143–161Google Scholar
  19. Duboule D, Dolle P (1989) The structural and functional organization of the murine HOX gene family resembles that of Drosophila homeotic genes. EMBO J 5:1497–1505Google Scholar
  20. Enghoff H, Dohle W, Blower JG (1993) Anamorphosis in millipede (Diplopoda) — the present state of knowledge with some developmental and phylogenetic considerations. Zool J Linn Soc 109:103–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Falciani F, Hausdorf B, Schröder R, Akam M, Tautz D, Denell R, Brown S (1996) Class 3 Hox genes in insects and the origin of zen. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:8479–8484PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ferrier DE, Akam M (1996) Organization of the Hox gene cluster in the grasshopper, Schistocerca gregaria. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:13024–13029PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Foelix RF (1996) Biology of spiders, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Frohnhöfer HG, Nüsslein-Volhard C (1986) Organization of anterior patterning the Drosophila embryo by the maternal gene bicoid. Nature 324:120–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Galant R, Carroll SB (2002) Evolution of a transcriptional repression domain in an insect Hox protein. Nature 415:910–913PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gonzalez-Reyes A, Morata G (1990) The developmental effect of overexpressing a Ubx product in Drosophila embryos is dependent on its interactions with other homeotic products. Cell 61:515–522PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Graham A, Papalopulu N, Krumlauf R (1989) The murine and Drosophila homeobox gene complexes have common features of organization and expression. Cell 5:367–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Harzsch S, Wildt M, Battelle B, Waloszek D (2005) Immunohistochemical localization of neurotransmitters in the nervous system of larval Limulus polyphemus (Chelicerata, Xiphosura): evidence for a conserved protocerebral architecture in Euarthropoda. Arthropod Struct Dev 34:327–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hughes CL, Kaufman TC (2000) RNAi analysis of Deformed, proboscipedia and Sex combs reduced in the milkweed bug Oncopeltus fasciatus: novel roles for Hox genes in the hemipteran head. Development 127:3683–3694PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Hughes CL, Kaufman TC (2002a) Exploring the myriapod body plan: expression patterns of the ten Hox genes in a centipede. Development 19:1225–1238Google Scholar
  31. Hughes CL, Kaufman TC (2002b) Hox genes and the evolution of the arthropod body plan. Evol Dev 4:459–499PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hughes CL, Liu PZ, Kaufman TC (2004) Expression patterns of the rogue Hox genes Hox3/zen and fushi tarazu in the apterygote insect Thermobia domestica. Evol Dev 6:393–401PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Janssen R, Prpic N-M, Damen WGM (2004) Gene expression suggests decoupled dorsal and ventral segmentation in the millipede Glomeris marginata (Myriapoda: Diplopoda). Dev Biol 268:89–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Janssen R, Prpic N-M, Damen WGM (2006) A review of the correlation of tergites, sternites, and leg pairs in diplopods. Front Zool 3:2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Jürgens G, Wieschaus E, Nüsslein-Volhard C, Kluding H (1984) Mutations effecting the pattern of the larval cuticle in Drosophila melanogaster. II. Zygotic loci on the third chromosome. Wilhelm Roux Arch Dev Biol 193:283–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kaufman TC, Seeger MA, Olsen G (1990) Molecular and genetic organization of the Antennapedia gene complex of Drosophila melanogaster. Adv Genet 287:309–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lewis EB (1978) A gene complex controlling segmentation in Drosophila. Nature 276:565–570PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mann RS, Hogness DS (1990) Functional dissection of Ultrabithorax protein in D. melanogaster. Cell 60:597–610PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mann RS, (1997) Why are Itox genes clustered? Bioessays 19:661–664PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McGinnis W, Krumlauf R (1992) Homeobox genes and axial patterning. Cell 68:283–302PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mittmann B, Scholtz G (2003) Development of the nervous system in the “head” of Limulus polyphemus (Chelicerata: Xiphosura): morphological evidence for a correspondence between the segments of the chelicerae and of the (first) antennae of Mandibulata. Dev Genes Evol 213:9–17PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Mouchel-Vielh E, Blin M, Rigolot C, Deutsch JS (2002) Expression of a homologue of the fushi tarazu (ftz) gene in a cirripede crustacean. Evol Dev 4:76–85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Powers TP, Hogan J, Ke Z, Dymbrowski K, Wang X, Collins FH, Kaufman TC (2000) Characterization of the Hox cluster from the mosquito Anopheles gambiae (Diptera: Culicidae). Evol Dev 2:311–325PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Prpic NM, Tautz D (2003) The expression of the proximodistal axis patterning genes Distal-less and dachshund in the appendages of Glomeris marginata (Myriapoda: Diplopoda) suggests a special role of these genes in patterning the head appendages. Dev Biol 260:97–112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pultz MA, Diederich RJ, Cribbs DL, Kaufman TC (1988) The proboscipedia locus of the Antennapedia complex: a molecular and genetic analysis. Genes Dev 2:901–920PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Ronshaugen M, McGinnis N, McGinnis W (2002) Hox protein mutation and macroevolution of the insect body plan. Nature 415:914–917PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Rushlow C, Levine M (1990) Role of the zerknüllt gene in dorsal–ventral pattern formation in Drosophila. In: Wright TRF (ed) Advances in genetics, vol 27. Genetic regulatory hierarchies in development. Academic, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  48. Sanchez-Herrero E, Vernos I, Marco R, Morata G (1985) Genetic organization of Drosophila bithorax complex. Nature 313:108–113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sanetra M, Begemann G, Becker M-B, Meyer A (2005) Conservation and co-option in developmental programmes: the importance of homology relationships. Front Zool 2:15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stauber M, Prell A, Schmidt-Ott U (2002) A single Hox3 gene with composite bicoid and zerknüllt expression characteristics in non-Cyclorrhaphan flies. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:274–279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Telford MJ (2000) Evidence for the derivation of the Drosophila fushi tarazu gene from a Hox gene orthologous to lophotrochozoan Lox5. Curr Biol 10:253–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Telford MJ, Thomas RH (1998a) Expression of homeobox genes shows chelicerate arthropods retain their deuterocerebral segment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:10671–10675PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Telford MJ, Thomas RH (1998b) Of mites and zen: expression studies in a chelicerate arthropod confirm zen is a divergent Hox gene. Dev Genes Evol 208:591–594PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. van der Zee M, Berns N, Roth S (2005) Distinct functions of the Tribolium zerknüllt genes in serosa specification and dorsal closure. Curr Biol 15:624–636PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Westheide W, Rieger R (eds) (1996) Spezielle Zoologie Teil 1: Einzeller und Wirbellose Tiere. Gustav Fischer Verlag, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  56. Weygoldt (1985) Ontogeny of the arachnid central nervous system. In: Barth FG (ed) Neurobiology of arachnids. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 20–37Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Genetics, Department for Evolutionary GeneticsUniversity of CologneKölnGermany
  2. 2.Department of Earth Sciences, PalaeobiologyUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations