Development Genes and Evolution

, Volume 224, Issue 2, pp 87–96 | Cite as

Expression of arthropod distal limb-patterning genes in the onychophoran Euperipatoides kanangrensis

  • Marta Bastos Oliveira
  • Simon Eckerström Liedholm
  • Jordi Estefa Lopez
  • Annalena A. Lochte
  • Magdalena Pazio
  • Jesus Pena Martin
  • Patrik Rödin Mörch
  • Seela Salakka
  • Julia York
  • Andrew Yoshimoto
  • Ralf JanssenEmail author
Original Article


A current hypothesis states that the ancestral limb of arthropods is composed of only two segments. The proximal segment represents the main part of the modern leg, and the distal segment represents the tarsus and claw of the modern leg. If the distal part of the limb is an ancestral feature, one would expect conserved regulatory gene networks acting in distal limb development in all arthropods and possibly even their sister group, the onychophorans. We investigated the expression patterns of six genes known to function during insect distal limb development in the onychophoran Euperipatoides kanangrensis, i.e., clawless (cll), aristaless (al), spineless (ss), zinc finger homeodomain 2 (zfh2), rotund (rn), and Lim1. We find that all investigated genes are expressed in at least some of the onychophoran limbs. The expression patterns of most of these genes, however, display crucial differences to the known insect patterns. The results of this study question the hypothesis of conserved distal limb evolution in arthropods and highlight the need for further studies on arthropod limb development.


Arthropod limb development Evolution Limb patterning 



The experiments were conducted during the “Evolution and Development” course at Uppsala University in the spring of 2013. We gratefully acknowledge the support of the New South Wales government Department of Environment and Climate Change by provision of a permit SL100159 to collect onychophorans at the Kanangra Boyd National Park and the Australian government Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage, and the Arts for export permits WT2009-4598 and WT2012-4704. The authors wish to thank Jean Joss, Rolf Ericsson, Robyn Stutchbury, and especially Noel Tait, for their help during onychophoran collection. Mattias Hogvall is thanked for his help as laboratory assistant. Nico Posnien and Alistair McGregor helped with the analysis of the embryonic transcriptome.

Supplementary material

427_2014_466_MOESM1_ESM.doc (36 kb)
ESM 1 (DOC 35 kb)
427_2014_466_MOESM2_ESM.doc (28 kb)
ESM 2 (DOC 27 kb)
427_2014_466_MOESM3_ESM.psd (4 mb)
Fig. S1 Alignments. Aligned are the conserved regions. For CLL, AL and LIM1 this is the HOMEODOMAINS; for RN this is the ZINC FINGER DOMAIN; for ZFH2 these are the three HOMEODOMAINS; for SS these are the two PAS domains. Dashes (-) indicate identical amino acids as in the onychophoran. Dots (.) indicate gaps in the alignment. Note the differences between the orthologs and other closely related genes. Abbreviations: Am, Apis mellifera (Insecta: Hymenoptera); Dm, Drosophila melanogaster (Insecta: Diptera); Dp, Daphnia pulex (Crustacea: Branchiopoda); Ek, Euperipatoides kanangrensis (Onychophora: Peripatopsidae); Gb, Gryllus bimaculatus (Insecta: Orthoptera); Gm, Glomeris marginata (Myriapoda: Diplopoda); Ma, Megaselia abdita (Insecta: Diptera); Nv, Nasonia vitripennis (Insecta: Hymenoptera); Tc, Tribolium castaneum (Insecta: Coleoptera). (PSD 4082 kb)


  1. Angelini DR, Kikuchi M, Jockusch EL (2009) Genetic patterning in the adult capitate antenna of the beetle Tribolium castaneum. Dev Biol 327:240–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angelini DR, Smith FW, Jockusch EL (2012) Extent with modification: leg patterning in the beetle Tribolium castaneum and the evolution of serial homologs. G3 (Bethesda) 2:235–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beermann A, Schroeder R (2004) Functional stability of the aristaless gene in appendage tip formation during evolution. Dev Genes Evol 214:303–308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Budd GE (2002) A palaeontological solution to the arthropod head problem. Nature 417:271–275PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Budd GE, Jensen S (2000) A critical reappraisal of the fossil record of the bilaterian phyla. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 75:253–295PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Budd GE, Telford MJ (2009) The origin and evolution of arthropods. Nature 457:812–817PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Campbell G (2005) Regulation of gene expression in the distal region of the Drosophila leg by the Hox11 homolog, C15. Dev Biol 278:607–618PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Campbell LI, Rota-Stabelli O, Edgecombe GD, Marchioro T, Longhorn SJ, Telford MJ, Philippe H, Rebecchi L, Peterson KJ, Pisani D (2011) MicroRNAs and phylogenomics resolve the relationships of Tardigrada and suggest that velvet worms are the sister group of Arthropoda. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:15920–15924PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Casares F, Mann RS (2001) The ground state of the ventral appendage in Drosophila. Science 293:1477–1480PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cohen SM (1990) Specification of limb development in the Drosophila embryo by positional cues from segmentation genes. Nature 343:173–177PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dear TN, Rabbitts TH (1994) A Drosophila melanogaster homologue of the T-cell oncogene HOX11 localises to a cluster of homeobox genes. Gene 141:225–229PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Duncan DM, Burgess EA, Duncan I (1998) Control of distal antennal identity and tarsal development in Drosophila by spineless-aristapedia, a homolog of the mammalian dioxin receptor. Genes Dev 12:1290–1303PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dunn CW, Hejnol A, Matus DQ, Pang K, Browne WE, Smith SA, Seaver E, Rouse GW, Obst M, Edgecombe GD, Sorensen MV, Haddock SHD, Schmidt-Rhaesa A, Okusu A, Kristensen RM, Wheeler WC, Martindale MQ, Giribet G (2008) Broad phylogenomic sampling improves resolution of the animal tree of life. Nature 452:745–749PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Edgecombe GD (2010) Arthropod phylogeny: an overview from the perspectives of morphology, molecular data and the fossil record. Arthropod Struct Dev 39:74–87PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Emmons RB, Duncan D, Estes PA, Kiefel P, Mosher JT, Sonnenfeld M, Ward MP, Duncan I, Crews ST (1999) The spineless-aristapedia and tango bHLH-PAS proteins interact to control antennal and tarsal development in Drosophila. Development 126:3937–3945PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Eriksson BJ, Tait NN, Budd GE (2003) Head development in the onychophoran Euperipatoides kanangrensis with particular reference to the central nervous system. J Morphol 255:1–23PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Eriksson BJ, Tait NN, Budd GE, Akam M (2009) The involvement of engrailed and wingless during segmentation in the onychophoran Euperipatoides kanangrensis (Peripatopsidae: Onychophora) (Reid 1996). Dev Genes Evol 219:249–264PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eriksson BJ, Tait NN, Budd GE, Janssen R, Akam M (2010) Head patterning and Hox gene expression in an onychophoran and its implications for the arthropod head problem. Dev Genes Evol 220:117–122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Galindo MI, Bishop SA, Greig S, Couso JP (2002) Leg patterning driven by proximal-distal interactions and EGFR signaling. Science 297:256–259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Giribet G, Edgecombe GD (2012) Reevaluating the arthropod tree of life. Annu Rev Entomol 57:167–186PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grossmann D, Prpic NM (2012) Egfr signaling regulates distal as well as medial fate in the embryonic leg of Tribolium castaneum. Dev Biol 370:264–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guarner A, Manjon C, Edwards K, Steller H, Suzanne M, Sanchez-Herrero E (2014) The zinc finger homeodomain-2 gene of Drosophila controls Notch targets and regulates apoptosis in the tarsal segments. Dev Biol. doi: 10.1016/j.ydbio.2013.10.011 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Higashijima S, Kojima T, Michiue T, Ishimaru S, Emori Y, Saigo K (1992) Dual Bar homeo box genes of Drosophila required in two photoreceptor cells, R1 and R6, and primary pigment cells for normal eye development. Genes Dev 6:50–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Janssen R (2013) Developmental abnormalities in Glomeris marginata (Villers 1789) (Myriapoda: Diplopoda): implications for body axis determination in a myriapod. Naturwissenschaften 100:33–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Janssen R, Budd GE (2013) Deciphering the onychophoran ‘segmentation gene cascade’: gene expression reveals limited involvement of pair rule gene orthologs in segmentation, but a highly conserved segment polarity gene network. Dev Biol 382:224–234PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Janssen R, Eriksson BJ, Budd GE, Akam M, Prpic NM (2010) Gene expression patterns in an onychophoran reveal that regionalization predates limb segmentation in pan-arthropods. Evol Dev 12:363–372PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kimm MA, Prpic NM (2006) Formation of the arthropod labrum by fusion of paired and rotated limb-bud-like primordia. Zoomorphology 125:147–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kittelmann M, Schinko JB, Winkler M, Bucher G, Wimmer EA, Prpic NM (2009) Insertional mutagenesis screening identifies the zinc finger homeodomain 2 (zfh2) gene as a novel factor required for embryonic leg development in Tribolium castaneum. Dev Genes Evol 219:399–407PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kojima T (2004) The mechanism of Drosophila leg development along the proximodistal axis. Dev Growth Differ 46:115–129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kojima T, Tsuji T, Saigo K (2005) A concerted action of a paired-type homeobox gene, aristaless, and a homolog of Hox11/tlx homeobox gene, clawless, is essential for the distal tip development of the Drosophila leg. Dev Biol 279:434–445PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lai Z, Fortini ME, Rubin GM (1991) The embryonic expression patterns of zfh-1 and zfh-2, two Drosophila genes encoding novel zinc-finger homeodomain proteins. Mech Dev 34:123–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lecuit T, Cohen SM (1997) Proximal-distal axis formation in the Drosophila leg. Nature 388:139–145PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mayer G (2006) Origin and differentiation of nephridia in the Onychophora provide no support for the Articulata. Zoomorphology 125:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Miyawaki K, Inoue Y, Mito T, Fujimoto T, Matsushima K, Shinmyo Y, Ohuchi H, Noji S (2002) Expression patterns of aristaless in developing appendages of Gryllus bimaculatus (cricket). Mech Dev 113:181–184PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Oliveira IS, Mayer G (2013) Apodemes associated with limbs support serial homology of claws and jaws in Onychophora (velvet worms). J Morph 274:1180–1190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Posnien N, Bashasab F, Bucher G (2009) The insect upper lip (labrum) is a nonsegmental appendage-like structure. Evol Dev 11:480–488PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pueyo JI, Galindo MI, Bishop SA, Couso JP (2000) Proximal-distal leg development in Drosophila requires the apterous gene and the Lim1 homologue dlim1. Development 127:5391–5402PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Rauskolb C (2001) The establishment of segmentation in the Drosophila leg. Development 128:4511–4521PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Scholtz G, Edgecombe GD (2006) The evolution of arthropod heads: reconciling morphological, developmental and palaeontological evidence. Dev Genes Evol 216:395–415PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Shippy TD, Yeager SJ, Denell RE (2009) The Tribolium spineless ortholog specifies both larval and adult antennal identity. Dev Genes Evol 219:45–51PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shubin N, Tabin C, Carroll S (1997) Fossils, genes and the evolution of animal limbs. Nature 388:639–648PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Struhl G (1982) Genes controlling segmental specification in the Drosophila thorax. Proc Natl Acad Sci 79:7380–7384PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tautz D, Pfeifle C (1989) A non-radioactive in situ hybridization method for the localization of specific RNAs in Drosophila embryos reveals translational control of the segmentation gene hunchback. Chromosoma 98:81–85PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Toegel JP, Wimmer EA, Prpic NM (2009) Loss of spineless function transforms the Tribolium antenna into a thoracic leg with pretarsal, tibiotarsal, and femoral identity. Dev Genes Evol 219:53–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tsuji T, Sato A, Hiratani I, Taira M, Saigo K, Kojima T (2000) Requirements of Lim1, a Drosophila LIM-homeobox gene, for normal leg and antennal development. Development 127:4315–4323PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Walker MH, Tait NN (2004) Studies of embryonic development and the reproductive cycle in ovoviviparous Australian Onychophora (Peripatopsidae). J Zool (Lond) 264:333–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marta Bastos Oliveira
    • 2
  • Simon Eckerström Liedholm
    • 2
  • Jordi Estefa Lopez
    • 2
  • Annalena A. Lochte
    • 2
  • Magdalena Pazio
    • 2
  • Jesus Pena Martin
    • 2
  • Patrik Rödin Mörch
    • 2
  • Seela Salakka
    • 2
  • Julia York
    • 2
  • Andrew Yoshimoto
    • 2
  • Ralf Janssen
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Earth Sciences, PalaeobiologyUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Uppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations