|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
First published online 6 June 2007
doi: 10.1242/dev.001065
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Review |
National Research Centre `Frontiers in Genetics', Department of Zoology and Animal Biology, University of Geneva, Sciences III, Switzerland. School of Life Sciences, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale, Lausanne, Switzerland.
e-mails: Denis.Duboule{at}zoo.unige.ch; Denis.Duboule{at}epfl.ch
SUMMARY
Although all bilaterian animals have a related set of Hox genes, the genomic organization of this gene complement comes in different flavors. In some unrelated species, Hox genes are clustered; in others, they are not. This indicates that the bilaterian ancestor had a clustered Hox gene family and that, subsequently, this genomic organization was either maintained or lost. Remarkably, the tightest organization is found in vertebrates, raising the embarrassingly finalistic possibility that vertebrates have maintained best this ancestral configuration. Alternatively, could they have co-evolved with an increased `organization' of the Hox clusters, possibly linked to their genomic amplification, which would be at odds with our current perception of evolutionary mechanisms? When discussing the why's and how's of Hox gene clustering, we need to account for three points: the mechanisms of cluster evolution; the underlying biological constraints; and the developmental modes of the animals under consideration. By integrating these parameters, general conclusions emerge that can help solve the aforementioned dilemma.
"See my son, here time becomes space"Gurnemanz, in Parsifal (R. Wagner)
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  H. Y. Chang Anatomic Demarcation of Cells: Genes to Patterns Science, November 27, 2009; 326(5957): 1206 - 1207. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 V. Ravi, K. Lam, B.-H. Tay, A. Tay, S. Brenner, and B. Venkatesh Elephant shark (Callorhinchus milii) provides insights into the evolution of Hox gene clusters in gnathostomes PNAS, September 22, 2009; 106(38): 16327 - 16332. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Jimenez-Delgado, J. Pascual-Anaya, and J. Garcia-Fernandez Implications of duplicated cis-regulatory elements in the evolution of metazoans: the DDI model or how simplicity begets novelty Brief Funct Genomic Proteomic, August 3, 2009; (2009) elp029v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Soshnikova and D. Duboule Epigenetic Temporal Control of Mouse Hox Genes in Vivo Science, June 5, 2009; 324(5932): 1320 - 1323. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. Di-Poi, J. I. Montoya-Burgos, and D. Duboule Atypical relaxation of structural constraints in Hox gene clusters of the green anole lizard Genome Res., April 1, 2009; 19(4): 602 - 610. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Minoux, G. S. Antonarakis, M. Kmita, D. Duboule, and F. M. Rijli Rostral and caudal pharyngeal arches share a common neural crest ground pattern Development, February 15, 2009; 136(4): 637 - 645. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. L. Garaulet, D. Foronda, M. Calleja, and E. Sanchez-Herrero Polycomb-dependent Ultrabithorax Hox gene silencing induced by high Ultrabithorax levels in Drosophila Development, October 1, 2008; 135(19): 3219 - 3228. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Mungpakdee, H.-C. Seo, A. R. Angotzi, X. Dong, A. Akalin, and D. Chourrout Differential Evolution of the 13 Atlantic Salmon Hox Clusters Mol. Biol. Evol., July 1, 2008; 25(7): 1333 - 1343. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Deschamps Tailored Hox gene transcription and the making of the thumb Genes & Dev., February 1, 2008; 22(3): 293 - 296. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
