Department of Anatomy, Howard University College of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA.
Department of Anatomy, Physiology & Pharmacology, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
J Anat. 2021 Jul;239(1):12-31. doi: 10.1111/joa.13409. Epub 2021 Feb 24.
Animal body parts evolve with variable degrees of integration that nonetheless yield functional adult phenotypes: but, how? The analysis of modularity with Anatomical Network Analysis (AnNA) is used to quantitatively determine phenotypic modules based on the physical connection among anatomical elements, an approach that is valuable to understand developmental and evolutionary constraints. We created anatomical network models of the head, forelimb, and hindlimb of two taxa considered to represent a 'generalized' eutherian (placental: mouse) and metatherian (marsupial: opossum) anatomical configuration and compared them with our species, which has a derived eutherian configuration. In these models, nodes represent anatomical units and links represent their physical connection. Here, we aimed to identify: (1) the commonalities and differences in modularity between species, (2) whether modules present a potential phylogenetic character, and (3) whether modules preferentially reflect either developmental or functional aspects of anatomy, or a mix of both. We predicted differences between networks of metatherian and eutherian mammals that would best be explained by functional constraints, versus by constraints of development and/or phylogeny. The topology of contacts between bones, muscles, and bones + muscles showed that, among all three species, skeletal networks were more similar than musculoskeletal networks. There was no clear indication that humans and mice are more alike when compared to the opossum overall, even though their musculoskeletal and skeletal networks of fore- and hindlimbs are slightly more similar. Differences were greatest among musculoskeletal networks of heads and next of forelimbs, which showed more variation than hindlimbs, supporting previous anatomical studies indicating that in general the configuration of the hindlimbs changes less across evolutionary history. Most observations regarding the anatomical networks seem to be best explained by function, but an exception is the adult opossum ear ossicles. These ear bones might form an independent module because the incus and malleus are involved in forming a functional primary jaw that enables the neonate to attach to the teat, where this newborn will complete its development. Additionally, the human data show a specialized digit 1 module (thumb/big toe) in both limb types, likely the result of functional and evolutionary pressures, as our ape ancestors had highly movable big toes and thumbs.
动物身体部位的进化具有不同程度的整合,但仍能产生具有功能性的成年表型:但是,这是如何发生的呢?使用解剖网络分析(AnNA)对模块性进行分析,根据解剖元素之间的物理连接,定量确定表型模块,这种方法对于理解发育和进化限制非常有价值。我们创建了两个被认为代表“广义”合弓类(胎盘:老鼠)和后兽类(有袋类:负鼠)解剖结构的分类单元的头部、前肢和后肢的解剖网络模型,并将其与我们具有衍生合弓类配置的物种进行了比较。在这些模型中,节点代表解剖单位,链接代表它们的物理连接。在这里,我们旨在确定:(1)物种之间模块性的异同,(2)模块是否具有潜在的系统发育特征,以及(3)模块是否优先反映解剖结构的发育或功能方面,或者两者的混合。我们预测,有袋类和合弓类哺乳动物的网络之间的差异最好用功能限制来解释,而不是用发育和/或系统发育的限制来解释。骨骼、肌肉和骨骼+肌肉之间的接触拓扑结构表明,在所有三个物种中,骨骼网络比肌肉骨骼网络更相似。尽管人类和老鼠与负鼠相比,它们的前肢和后肢的肌肉骨骼和骨骼网络略为相似,但并没有明显的迹象表明它们总体上更相似。头部的肌肉骨骼网络和前肢的差异最大,其次是后肢,这表明它们在进化史上的变化较小,这与之前的解剖研究一致。关于解剖网络的大多数观察结果似乎最好用功能来解释,但有一个例外是成年负鼠的耳朵小骨。这些耳朵骨头可能形成一个独立的模块,因为砧骨和锤骨参与形成一个功能性的主要颌骨,使新生儿能够附着在乳头上,在那里这个新生儿将完成其发育。此外,人类数据显示,两种肢体类型都有一个特殊的数字 1 模块(拇指/大脚趾),这可能是功能和进化压力的结果,因为我们的猿类祖先有非常灵活的大脚趾和拇指。