Cargando…

Self-Organization and Genomic Causality in Models of Morphogenesis

The debate about what causes the generation of form and structure in embryological development goes back to antiquity. Most recently, it has focused on the divergent views as to whether the generation of patterns and form in development is a largely self-organized process or is mainly determined by...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Deichmann, Ute
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10297450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37372217
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/e25060873
_version_ 1785063886558330880
author Deichmann, Ute
author_facet Deichmann, Ute
author_sort Deichmann, Ute
collection PubMed
description The debate about what causes the generation of form and structure in embryological development goes back to antiquity. Most recently, it has focused on the divergent views as to whether the generation of patterns and form in development is a largely self-organized process or is mainly determined by the genome, in particular, complex developmental gene regulatory processes. This paper presents and analyzes pertinent models of pattern formation and form generation in a developing organism in the past and the present, with a special emphasis on Alan Turing’s 1952 reaction–diffusion model. I first draw attention to the fact that Turing’s paper remained, at first, without a noticeable impact on the community of biologists because purely physical–chemical models were unable to explain embryological development and often also simple repetitive patterns. I then show that from the year 2000 and onwards, Turing’s 1952 paper was increasingly cited also by biologists. The model was updated to include gene products and now seemed able to account for the generation of biological patterns, though discrepancies between models and biological reality remained. I then point out Eric Davidson’s successful theory of early embryogenesis based on gene-regulatory network analysis and its mathematical modeling that not only was able to provide a mechanistic and causal explanation for gene regulatory events controlling developmental cell fate specification but, unlike reaction–diffusion models, also addressed the effects of evolution and organisms’ longstanding developmental and species stability. The paper concludes with an outlook on further developments of the gene regulatory network model.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10297450
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102974502023-06-28 Self-Organization and Genomic Causality in Models of Morphogenesis Deichmann, Ute Entropy (Basel) Review The debate about what causes the generation of form and structure in embryological development goes back to antiquity. Most recently, it has focused on the divergent views as to whether the generation of patterns and form in development is a largely self-organized process or is mainly determined by the genome, in particular, complex developmental gene regulatory processes. This paper presents and analyzes pertinent models of pattern formation and form generation in a developing organism in the past and the present, with a special emphasis on Alan Turing’s 1952 reaction–diffusion model. I first draw attention to the fact that Turing’s paper remained, at first, without a noticeable impact on the community of biologists because purely physical–chemical models were unable to explain embryological development and often also simple repetitive patterns. I then show that from the year 2000 and onwards, Turing’s 1952 paper was increasingly cited also by biologists. The model was updated to include gene products and now seemed able to account for the generation of biological patterns, though discrepancies between models and biological reality remained. I then point out Eric Davidson’s successful theory of early embryogenesis based on gene-regulatory network analysis and its mathematical modeling that not only was able to provide a mechanistic and causal explanation for gene regulatory events controlling developmental cell fate specification but, unlike reaction–diffusion models, also addressed the effects of evolution and organisms’ longstanding developmental and species stability. The paper concludes with an outlook on further developments of the gene regulatory network model. MDPI 2023-05-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10297450/ /pubmed/37372217 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/e25060873 Text en © 2023 by the author. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Review
Deichmann, Ute
Self-Organization and Genomic Causality in Models of Morphogenesis
title Self-Organization and Genomic Causality in Models of Morphogenesis
title_full Self-Organization and Genomic Causality in Models of Morphogenesis
title_fullStr Self-Organization and Genomic Causality in Models of Morphogenesis
title_full_unstemmed Self-Organization and Genomic Causality in Models of Morphogenesis
title_short Self-Organization and Genomic Causality in Models of Morphogenesis
title_sort self-organization and genomic causality in models of morphogenesis
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10297450/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37372217
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/e25060873
work_keys_str_mv AT deichmannute selforganizationandgenomiccausalityinmodelsofmorphogenesis