|
|
|
|||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
doi: 10.1242/10.1242/dev.00099
1,
1 Department of Biology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5B7,
Canada
2 Southern Crop Protection and Food Research Center, Agriculture and Agri-Food
Canada, 1391 Sandford Street, London, Ontario, N5V 4T3, Canada
* Current address: Biochemistry Department, University of Otago, PO Box 56,
Dunedin, New Zealand
Author for correspondence (e-mail:
mgrbic{at}uwo.ca)
Accepted 6 August 2002
Embryo segmentation has been studied extensively in the fruit fly, Drosophila. These studies have demonstrated that a mechanism acting with dual segment periodicity is required for correct patterning of the body plan in this insect, but the evolutionary origin of the mechanism, the pair-rule system, is unclear. We have examined the expression of the homologues of two Drosophila pair-rule genes, runt and paired (Pax Group III), in segmenting embryos of the two-spotted spider mite (Tetranychus urticae Koch). Spider mites are chelicerates, a group of arthropods that diverged from the lineage leading to Drosophila at least 520 million years ago. In T. urticae, the Pax Group III gene Tu-pax3/7 was expressed during patterning of the prosoma, but not the opisthosoma, in a series of stripes which appear first in even numbered segments, and then in odd numbered segments. The mite runt homologue (Tu-run) in contrast was expressed early in a circular domains that resolved into a segmental pattern. The expression patterns of both of these genes also indicated they are regulated very differently from their Drosophila homologues. The expression pattern of Tu-pax3/7 lends support to the possibility that a pair-rule patterning mechanism is active in the segmentation pathways of chelicerates.
Key words: Pair-rule, Chelicerate, Evolution, Parasegment, Segmentation, runt, pax3/7
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. Van Leeuwen, B. Vanholme, S. Van Pottelberge, P. Van Nieuwenhuyse, R. Nauen, L. Tirry, and I. Denholm Mitochondrial heteroplasmy and the evolution of insecticide resistance: Non-Mendelian inheritance in action PNAS, April 22, 2008; 105(16): 5980 - 5985. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. K. Dearden, M. J. Wilson, L. Sablan, P. W. Osborne, M. Havler, E. McNaughton, K. Kimura, N. V. Milshina, M. Hasselmann, T. Gempe, et al. Patterns of conservation and change in honey bee developmental genes Genome Res., November 1, 2006; 16(11): 1376 - 1384. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. M. Donnell, L. S. Corley, G. Chen, and M. R. Strand Caste determination in a polyembryonic wasp involves inheritance of germ cells PNAS, July 6, 2004; 101(27): 10095 - 10100. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Relaix, D. Rocancourt, A. Mansouri, and M. Buckingham Divergent functions of murine Pax3 and Pax7 in limb muscle development Genes & Dev., May 1, 2004; 18(9): 1088 - 1105. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Akiyama-Oda and H. Oda Early patterning of the spider embryo: a cluster of mesenchymal cells at the cumulus produces Dpp signals received by germ disc epithelial cells Development, May 1, 2003; 130(9): 1735 - 1747. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||