Cargando…

Life cycle evolution: was the eumetazoan ancestor a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea?

BACKGROUND: Two theories for the origin of animal life cycles with planktotrophic larvae are now discussed seriously: The terminal addition theory proposes a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea as the ancestor of the eumetazoans with addition of benthic adult stages and retention of the planktotrop...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Nielsen, Claus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3751718/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23957497
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-13-171
_version_ 1782281653954019328
author Nielsen, Claus
author_facet Nielsen, Claus
author_sort Nielsen, Claus
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Two theories for the origin of animal life cycles with planktotrophic larvae are now discussed seriously: The terminal addition theory proposes a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea as the ancestor of the eumetazoans with addition of benthic adult stages and retention of the planktotrophic stages as larvae, i.e. the ancestral life cycles were indirect. The intercalation theory now proposes a benthic, deposit-feeding gastraea as the bilaterian ancestor with a direct development, and with planktotrophic larvae evolving independently in numerous lineages through specializations of juveniles. RESULTS: Information from the fossil record, from mapping of developmental types onto known phylogenies, from occurrence of apical organs, and from genetics gives no direct information about the ancestral eumetazoan life cycle; however, there are plenty of examples of evolution from an indirect development to direct development, and no unequivocal example of evolution in the opposite direction. Analyses of scenarios for the two types of evolution are highly informative. The evolution of the indirect spiralian life cycle with a trochophora larva from a planktotrophic gastraea is explained by the trochophora theory as a continuous series of ancestors, where each evolutionary step had an adaptational advantage. The loss of ciliated larvae in the ecdysozoans is associated with the loss of outer ciliated epithelia. A scenario for the intercalation theory shows the origin of the planktotrophic larvae of the spiralians through a series of specializations of the general ciliation of the juvenile. The early steps associated with the enhancement of swimming seem probable, but the following steps which should lead to the complicated downstream-collecting ciliary system are without any advantage, or even seem disadvantageous, until the whole structure is functional. None of the theories account for the origin of the ancestral deuterostome (ambulacrarian) life cycle. CONCLUSIONS: All the available information is strongly in favor of multiple evolution of non-planktotrophic development, and only the terminal addition theory is in accordance with the Darwinian theory by explaining the evolution through continuous series of adaptational changes. This implies that the ancestor of the eumetazoans was a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea, and that the adult stages of cnidarians (sessile) and bilaterians (creeping) were later additions to the life cycle. It further implies that the various larval types are of considerable phylogenetic value.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3751718
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37517182013-08-24 Life cycle evolution: was the eumetazoan ancestor a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea? Nielsen, Claus BMC Evol Biol Review BACKGROUND: Two theories for the origin of animal life cycles with planktotrophic larvae are now discussed seriously: The terminal addition theory proposes a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea as the ancestor of the eumetazoans with addition of benthic adult stages and retention of the planktotrophic stages as larvae, i.e. the ancestral life cycles were indirect. The intercalation theory now proposes a benthic, deposit-feeding gastraea as the bilaterian ancestor with a direct development, and with planktotrophic larvae evolving independently in numerous lineages through specializations of juveniles. RESULTS: Information from the fossil record, from mapping of developmental types onto known phylogenies, from occurrence of apical organs, and from genetics gives no direct information about the ancestral eumetazoan life cycle; however, there are plenty of examples of evolution from an indirect development to direct development, and no unequivocal example of evolution in the opposite direction. Analyses of scenarios for the two types of evolution are highly informative. The evolution of the indirect spiralian life cycle with a trochophora larva from a planktotrophic gastraea is explained by the trochophora theory as a continuous series of ancestors, where each evolutionary step had an adaptational advantage. The loss of ciliated larvae in the ecdysozoans is associated with the loss of outer ciliated epithelia. A scenario for the intercalation theory shows the origin of the planktotrophic larvae of the spiralians through a series of specializations of the general ciliation of the juvenile. The early steps associated with the enhancement of swimming seem probable, but the following steps which should lead to the complicated downstream-collecting ciliary system are without any advantage, or even seem disadvantageous, until the whole structure is functional. None of the theories account for the origin of the ancestral deuterostome (ambulacrarian) life cycle. CONCLUSIONS: All the available information is strongly in favor of multiple evolution of non-planktotrophic development, and only the terminal addition theory is in accordance with the Darwinian theory by explaining the evolution through continuous series of adaptational changes. This implies that the ancestor of the eumetazoans was a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea, and that the adult stages of cnidarians (sessile) and bilaterians (creeping) were later additions to the life cycle. It further implies that the various larval types are of considerable phylogenetic value. BioMed Central 2013-08-16 /pmc/articles/PMC3751718/ /pubmed/23957497 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-13-171 Text en Copyright © 2013 Nielsen; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Nielsen, Claus
Life cycle evolution: was the eumetazoan ancestor a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea?
title Life cycle evolution: was the eumetazoan ancestor a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea?
title_full Life cycle evolution: was the eumetazoan ancestor a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea?
title_fullStr Life cycle evolution: was the eumetazoan ancestor a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea?
title_full_unstemmed Life cycle evolution: was the eumetazoan ancestor a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea?
title_short Life cycle evolution: was the eumetazoan ancestor a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea?
title_sort life cycle evolution: was the eumetazoan ancestor a holopelagic, planktotrophic gastraea?
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3751718/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23957497
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-13-171
work_keys_str_mv AT nielsenclaus lifecycleevolutionwastheeumetazoanancestoraholopelagicplanktotrophicgastraea