Development Genes and Evolution

, Volume 216, Issue 12, pp 743–754 | Cite as

The evolution of colony-level development in the Siphonophora (Cnidaria:Hydrozoa)

  • Casey W. Dunn
  • Günter P. Wagner
Original Article


Evolutionary developmental biology has focused almost exclusively on multicellular organisms, but there are other relevant levels of biological organization that have remained largely neglected. Animal colonies are made up of multiple physiologically integrated and genetically identical units called zooids that are each homologous to solitary, free-living animals. Siphonophores, a group of pelagic hydrozoans (Cnidaria), have the most complex colony-level organization of all animals. Here the colony-level development of five siphonophore species, strategically sampled across the siphonophore phylogeny, is described from specimens collected using deep-sea submersibles and by self-contained underwater breathing apparatus diving. These species include three cystonects, Bathyphysa sibogae, Rhizophysa filiformis, and Rhizophysa eysenhardti, and two “physonects”, Agalma elegans and Nanomia bijuga. These data, together with previous findings, are analyzed in a phylogenetic framework to reconstruct key features of the history of colony-level organization and development in the Siphonophora. It is shown that gonodendra and gastrozooids of the examined cystonects arise as independent buds directly on the stem, whereas probud subdivision (the origin of feeding, reproductive, and other zooids from a single bud) is a synapomorphy of the Codonophora. The origin of probud subdivision is associated with the origin of cormidia as integrated units of colony organization, and may have allowed for greater morphological and ecological diversification in the Codonophora relative to the Cystonectae. It is also found that symmetry is labile in siphonophores, with multiple gains and/or losses of directional asymmetry in the group. This descriptive work will enable future mechanistic and molecular studies of colony-level development in the siphonophores.


Major transition in evolution Asexual reproduction Animal colonies Division of labor Functional specialization 



This work was supported by a mini-PEET grant from the Society for Systematic Biology, a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, and a National Science Foundation (NSF) doctoral dissertation improvement grant (DEB-0408014). Thanks to S.H.D. Haddock, J. Godfrey, L. Madin, C. Sardet, and C. Carré for their assistance with collecting siphonophores. E. Edwards provided valuable comments on the text. Special thanks to P. Pugh for making his specimens available for this work, for providing feedback on the manuscript, for checking some of the observations presented here, and, in particular, for our many illuminating conversations.


  1. Beklemishev WN (1969) Principles of comparative anatomy, vol 1. Promorphology. Oliver and Boyd, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  2. Bonner J (2001) First signals: the evolution of multicellular development. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  3. Buss L (1987) The evolution of individuality. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  4. Carré C, Carré D (1993) Ordre des Siphonophores. In: Doumenc D (ed) Traité de Zoologies: Anatomie, Systematique, Biologie, vol 3(2). Masson, Paris, pp 523–596Google Scholar
  5. Chun C (1885) Über die cyklische Entwickelung der Siphonophoren. Sitz Ber K Preuss Akad Wiss Berl 1885:511–529Google Scholar
  6. Dunn CW (2005) The complex colony-level organization of the deep-sea siphonophore Bargmannia elongata (Cnidaria, Hydrozoa) is directionally asymmetric and arises by the subdivision of pro-buds. Dev Dyn 234:835–845PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dunn CW, Pugh PR, Haddock SHD (2005) Molecular phylogenetics of the Siphonophora (Cnidaria), with implications for the evolution of functional specialization. Syst Biol 54:916–935PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gegenbaur C (1853) Beiträge zur näheren Kenntniss der Schwimmpolypen (Siphonophoren). Arch Naturgesch 5:285–344Google Scholar
  9. Haddock SHD, Dunn CW, Pugh PR (2005) A reexamination of siphonophore terminology and morphology, applied to the description of two new prayine species with remarkable bio-optical properties. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 85:695–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Haeckel E (1869) Zur Entwickelungsgeschichte der Siphonophoren. Natuurk Verh Prov Utrechtsh Genoots 6:1–120Google Scholar
  11. Hamner WM (1975) Underwater observations of blue-water plankton: logistics, techniques, and safety procedures for divers at sea. Limnol Oceanogr 20:1045–1051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kawamura T (1910) “Bozunira” and “Katsuwo no Eboshi” Rhizophysa and Physalia. Dobutz Z Tokyo 22:445–454Google Scholar
  13. Kawamura T (1911) “Shidarezakura Kurage” and “Nagayoraku Kurage” Cupulita picta Metschnikoff and Agalmopsis elegans Sars. Dobutz Z Tokyo 23:359–363Google Scholar
  14. Leloup E (1936) Siphonophores calycophorides (suite) et physophorides provenant des campagnes du Prince Albert Ier de Monaco. Res Camp Sci Monaco 93:3–36Google Scholar
  15. Maynard Smith J, Szathmáry E (1995) Major transitions in evolution. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Pugh PR (1984) The diel migrations and distributions within a mesopelagic community in the north east Atlantic. 7. Siphonophores. Prog Oceanogr 13:461–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Pugh PR (2003) A revision of the family Forskaliidae (Siphonophora, “Physonectae”). J Nat Hist 37:1281–1327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pugh PR, Harbison GR (1986) New observations on a rare physonect siphonophore, Lychnagalma utricularia (Claus, 1879). J Mar Biol Assoc UK 66:695–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Robison BH (1995) Light in the ocean’s midwaters. Sci Am 273:60–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schneider KC (1896) Mittheilungen über Siphonophoren. II. Grundriss der organization der Siphonophoren. Zool Jahrb Abt Anat Ontog Tiere 9:571–664Google Scholar
  21. Totton AK (1954) Siphonophora of the Indian Ocean. Discov Rep 27:1–162Google Scholar
  22. Totton AK (1956) Development and metamorphosis of the larva of Agalma elegans (Sars) (Siphonophora “Physonectae”). Pap Mar Biol Oceanogr 3(Suppl):239–241Google Scholar
  23. Totton AK (1960) Studies on Physalia physalis. Part 1. Natural history and morphology. Discov Rep 30:301–368Google Scholar
  24. Totton AK (1965) A synopsis of the siphonophora. British Museum of Natural History, LondonGoogle Scholar
  25. Youngbluth M (1984) Manned submersibles and sophisticated instrumentation: tools for oceanographical research. In: “Proceedings of SUBTECH ’83 Symposium.” Society for Underwater Technology, London, pp 335–344Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kewalo Marine LaboratoryUniversity of HawaiiHonoluluUSA
  2. 2.Department Ecology and Evolutionary BiologyYale UniversityNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations