Cargando…

Anatomical Network Comparison of Human Upper and Lower, Newborn and Adult, and Normal and Abnormal Limbs, with Notes on Development, Pathology and Limb Serial Homology vs. Homoplasy

How do the various anatomical parts (modules) of the animal body evolve into very different integrated forms (integration) yet still function properly without decreasing the individual’s survival? This long-standing question remains unanswered for multiple reasons, including lack of consensus about...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Diogo, Rui, Esteve-Altava, Borja, Smith, Christopher, Boughner, Julia C., Rasskin-Gutman, Diego
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4599883/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26452269
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140030
_version_ 1782394337099776000
author Diogo, Rui
Esteve-Altava, Borja
Smith, Christopher
Boughner, Julia C.
Rasskin-Gutman, Diego
author_facet Diogo, Rui
Esteve-Altava, Borja
Smith, Christopher
Boughner, Julia C.
Rasskin-Gutman, Diego
author_sort Diogo, Rui
collection PubMed
description How do the various anatomical parts (modules) of the animal body evolve into very different integrated forms (integration) yet still function properly without decreasing the individual’s survival? This long-standing question remains unanswered for multiple reasons, including lack of consensus about conceptual definitions and approaches, as well as a reasonable bias toward the study of hard tissues over soft tissues. A major difficulty concerns the non-trivial technical hurdles of addressing this problem, specifically the lack of quantitative tools to quantify and compare variation across multiple disparate anatomical parts and tissue types. In this paper we apply for the first time a powerful new quantitative tool, Anatomical Network Analysis (AnNA), to examine and compare in detail the musculoskeletal modularity and integration of normal and abnormal human upper and lower limbs. In contrast to other morphological methods, the strength of AnNA is that it allows efficient and direct empirical comparisons among body parts with even vastly different architectures (e.g. upper and lower limbs) and diverse or complex tissue composition (e.g. bones, cartilages and muscles), by quantifying the spatial organization of these parts—their topological patterns relative to each other—using tools borrowed from network theory. Our results reveal similarities between the skeletal networks of the normal newborn/adult upper limb vs. lower limb, with exception to the shoulder vs. pelvis. However, when muscles are included, the overall musculoskeletal network organization of the upper limb is strikingly different from that of the lower limb, particularly that of the more proximal structures of each limb. Importantly, the obtained data provide further evidence to be added to the vast amount of paleontological, gross anatomical, developmental, molecular and embryological data recently obtained that contradicts the long-standing dogma that the upper and lower limbs are serial homologues. In addition, the AnNA of the limbs of a trisomy 18 human fetus strongly supports Pere Alberch's ill-named "logic of monsters" hypothesis, and contradicts the commonly accepted idea that birth defects often lead to lower integration (i.e. more parcellation) of anatomical structures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4599883
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45998832015-10-20 Anatomical Network Comparison of Human Upper and Lower, Newborn and Adult, and Normal and Abnormal Limbs, with Notes on Development, Pathology and Limb Serial Homology vs. Homoplasy Diogo, Rui Esteve-Altava, Borja Smith, Christopher Boughner, Julia C. Rasskin-Gutman, Diego PLoS One Research Article How do the various anatomical parts (modules) of the animal body evolve into very different integrated forms (integration) yet still function properly without decreasing the individual’s survival? This long-standing question remains unanswered for multiple reasons, including lack of consensus about conceptual definitions and approaches, as well as a reasonable bias toward the study of hard tissues over soft tissues. A major difficulty concerns the non-trivial technical hurdles of addressing this problem, specifically the lack of quantitative tools to quantify and compare variation across multiple disparate anatomical parts and tissue types. In this paper we apply for the first time a powerful new quantitative tool, Anatomical Network Analysis (AnNA), to examine and compare in detail the musculoskeletal modularity and integration of normal and abnormal human upper and lower limbs. In contrast to other morphological methods, the strength of AnNA is that it allows efficient and direct empirical comparisons among body parts with even vastly different architectures (e.g. upper and lower limbs) and diverse or complex tissue composition (e.g. bones, cartilages and muscles), by quantifying the spatial organization of these parts—their topological patterns relative to each other—using tools borrowed from network theory. Our results reveal similarities between the skeletal networks of the normal newborn/adult upper limb vs. lower limb, with exception to the shoulder vs. pelvis. However, when muscles are included, the overall musculoskeletal network organization of the upper limb is strikingly different from that of the lower limb, particularly that of the more proximal structures of each limb. Importantly, the obtained data provide further evidence to be added to the vast amount of paleontological, gross anatomical, developmental, molecular and embryological data recently obtained that contradicts the long-standing dogma that the upper and lower limbs are serial homologues. In addition, the AnNA of the limbs of a trisomy 18 human fetus strongly supports Pere Alberch's ill-named "logic of monsters" hypothesis, and contradicts the commonly accepted idea that birth defects often lead to lower integration (i.e. more parcellation) of anatomical structures. Public Library of Science 2015-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4599883/ /pubmed/26452269 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140030 Text en © 2015 Diogo et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Diogo, Rui
Esteve-Altava, Borja
Smith, Christopher
Boughner, Julia C.
Rasskin-Gutman, Diego
Anatomical Network Comparison of Human Upper and Lower, Newborn and Adult, and Normal and Abnormal Limbs, with Notes on Development, Pathology and Limb Serial Homology vs. Homoplasy
title Anatomical Network Comparison of Human Upper and Lower, Newborn and Adult, and Normal and Abnormal Limbs, with Notes on Development, Pathology and Limb Serial Homology vs. Homoplasy
title_full Anatomical Network Comparison of Human Upper and Lower, Newborn and Adult, and Normal and Abnormal Limbs, with Notes on Development, Pathology and Limb Serial Homology vs. Homoplasy
title_fullStr Anatomical Network Comparison of Human Upper and Lower, Newborn and Adult, and Normal and Abnormal Limbs, with Notes on Development, Pathology and Limb Serial Homology vs. Homoplasy
title_full_unstemmed Anatomical Network Comparison of Human Upper and Lower, Newborn and Adult, and Normal and Abnormal Limbs, with Notes on Development, Pathology and Limb Serial Homology vs. Homoplasy
title_short Anatomical Network Comparison of Human Upper and Lower, Newborn and Adult, and Normal and Abnormal Limbs, with Notes on Development, Pathology and Limb Serial Homology vs. Homoplasy
title_sort anatomical network comparison of human upper and lower, newborn and adult, and normal and abnormal limbs, with notes on development, pathology and limb serial homology vs. homoplasy
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4599883/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26452269
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140030
work_keys_str_mv AT diogorui anatomicalnetworkcomparisonofhumanupperandlowernewbornandadultandnormalandabnormallimbswithnotesondevelopmentpathologyandlimbserialhomologyvshomoplasy
AT estevealtavaborja anatomicalnetworkcomparisonofhumanupperandlowernewbornandadultandnormalandabnormallimbswithnotesondevelopmentpathologyandlimbserialhomologyvshomoplasy
AT smithchristopher anatomicalnetworkcomparisonofhumanupperandlowernewbornandadultandnormalandabnormallimbswithnotesondevelopmentpathologyandlimbserialhomologyvshomoplasy
AT boughnerjuliac anatomicalnetworkcomparisonofhumanupperandlowernewbornandadultandnormalandabnormallimbswithnotesondevelopmentpathologyandlimbserialhomologyvshomoplasy
AT rasskingutmandiego anatomicalnetworkcomparisonofhumanupperandlowernewbornandadultandnormalandabnormallimbswithnotesondevelopmentpathologyandlimbserialhomologyvshomoplasy