Biological Theory

, Volume 1, Issue 2, pp 165–178 | Cite as

Developmental Ascendency: From Bottom-up to Top-down Control

Article

Abstract

Development is a process whereby a relatively unspecified system comprised of loosely connected lower level parts becomes organized into a coherent, higher-level agency. Its temporal corollaries are growth, increasingly deterministic behavior, and a progressive reduction of developmental potential. During immature stages with relatively low specification and high potential, development is largely controlled by local interactions from the “bottom-up,” whereas during more highly specified stages with reduced potential, emergent autocatalytic processes exert “top-down” control. Robert Ulanowicz has shown that this phenomenology of ascendency follows thermodynamic principles and can be described quantitatively using information theory, providing a general theory of development. However, the theory has not found a wide audience among developmental biologists, as genetic determinism encourages the popular reductionistic perception that ontogeny is controlled entirely by molecular mechanisms that exert efficient causality from the bottom-up. Nonetheless, measurements of metabolic rates and mRNA complexity in developing embryos, as well as functional analyses of gene regulatory systems, indicate that ontogeny fits the paradigm of developmental ascendency. Beyond informing biomedical research and the interpretation of large datasets obtained by systems-biological approaches, developmental ascendency helps explain the origin of life, and, being independent of scale, provides an overarching explanation for phylogenetic change that contextualizes Darwinian evolution.

Keywords

development ecology embryo emergence evolution growth hierarchy ontogeny phylogeny sea urchin 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Supplementary material

13752_2015_1020165_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (77 kb)
Supplementary material, approximately 79 KB.

References

  1. Akashi K, He X, Chen J, Iwasaki H, Niu C, Steenhard B, Zhang J, Haug J, Li L (2003) Transcriptional accessibility for genes of multiple tissues and hematopoietic lineages is hierarchically controlled during early hematopoiesis. Blood 101: 383–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Al-Hajj M, Becker MW, Wicha M, Weissman I, Clarke MF (2004) Therapeutic implications of cancer stem cells. Current Opinion in Genetics and Development 14: 43–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnone MI, Bogarad LD, Collazo A, Kirchhamer CV, Cameron RA, Rast JP, Gregorians A, Davidson EH (1997) Green Fluorescent Protein in the sea urchin: New experimental approaches to transcriptional regulatory analysis in embryos and larvae. Development 124: 4649–4659.Google Scholar
  4. Arnone MI, Davidson EH (1997) The hardwiring of development: Organization and function of genomic regulatory systems. Development 124: 1851–1864.Google Scholar
  5. Arnone MI, Martin EL, Davidson EH (1998) Cis-regulation downstream of cell type specification: A single compact element controls the complex expression of the CyIIa gene in sea urchin embryos. Development 125: 1381–1395.Google Scholar
  6. Bissell MJ, Labarge MA (2005) Context, tissue plasticity, and cancer: Are tumor stem cells also regulated by the microenvironment? Cancer Cell 7: 17–23.Google Scholar
  7. Blackstone NW (1998) Morphological, physiological and metabolic comparisons between runner-like and sheet-like inbred lines of a colonial hydroid. Journal of Experimental Biology 201(20): 2821–2831.Google Scholar
  8. Blackstone NW (1999) Redox control in development and evolution: Evidence from colonial hydroids. Journal of Experimental Biology 202(24): 3541–3553.Google Scholar
  9. Blackstone NW (2000) Redox control and the evolution of multicellularity. Bioessays 22: 947–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Blackstone NW (2003) Redox signaling in the growth and development of colonial hydroids. Journal of Experimental Biology 206(4): 651–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Buss LW (1987) The Evolution of Individuality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Child CM (1941a) Patterns and Problems of Development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Child CM (1941b) Formation and reduction of indophenol blue in development of an echinoderm. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 27: 523–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Coffman JA (2005) On reductionism, organicism, somatic mutations and cancer. Bioessays 27: 459; author reply, 460–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Coffman JA, Davidson EH (2001) Oral-aboral axis specification in the sea urchin embryo: I. Axis entrainment by respiratory asymmetry. Developmental Biology 230: 18–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Coffman JA, McCarthy JJ, Dickey-Sims C, Robertson AJ (2004) Oral-aboral axis specification in the sea urchin embryo: II. Mitochondrial distribution and redox state contribute to establishing polarity in Strongylocentrotus purpuratus. Developmental Biology 273: 160–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cox KH, Angerer LM, Lee JJ, Davidson EH, Angerer RC (1986) Cell lineage-specific programs of expression of multiple actin genes during sea urchin embryogenesis. Journal of Molecular Biology 188: 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Crawford DL (2001) Functional genomics does not have to be limited to a few select organisms. Genome Biology 2. http://genomebiolog.com/2001/2/1/interactions/1001/
  19. Czihak G (1963) Entwicklungsphysiologische Untersuchungen an Echiniden (Verteilung und Bedeutung der Cytochromoxydase). Roux’ Archiy Für Entwicklungsmechanik 154: 272–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Davidson EH (1986) Gene Activity in Early Development. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  21. Davidson EH (1990) How embryos work: A comparative view of diverse modes of cell fate specification. Development 108: 365–389.Google Scholar
  22. Davidson EH (1991) Spatial mechanisms of gene regulation in metazoan embryos. Development 113: 1–26.Google Scholar
  23. Davidson EH (2001) Genomic Regulatory Systems: Development and Evolution. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  24. Davidson EH, Cameron RA, Ransick A (1998) Specification of cell fate in the sea urchin embryo: Summary and some proposed mechanisms. Development 125: 3269–3290.Google Scholar
  25. Davidson EH, McClay DR, Hood L (2003) Regulatory gene networks and the properties of the developmental process. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 100: 1475–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Davidson EH, Rast JP, Oliveri P, Ransick A, Calestani C, Yuh CH, Minokawa T, Amore G, Hinman V, Arenas-Mena C, Otim O, Brown T, Livi CB, Lee PY, Revilla R, Clarke PJC, Rust AG, Pan Z, Arnone MI, Rowen L, Cameron RA, McClay DR, Hood L, Bolouri H (2002a) A provisional regulatory gene network for specification of endomesoderm in the sea urchin embryo. Developmental Biology 246: 162–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Davidson EH, Rast JP, Oliveri P, Ransick A, Calestani C, Yuh C-H, Minokawa T, Amore G, Hinman V, Arenas-Mena C, Otim O, Brown CT, Livi CB, Lee PY, Revilla R, Rust AG, Pan Zj, Schilstra MJ, Clarke PJC, Arnone MI, Rowen L, Cameron RA, McClay DR, Hood L, Bolouri H (2002b) A genomic regulatory network for development. Science 295: 1669–1678.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Driesch H (1892) Entwicklungsmechanisme Studien: I. Der Werth der beiden ersten Furchungszellen in der Echinodermentwicklung. Experimentelle Erzeugen von Theil und Doppelbildung. Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Zoologie 53: 160–178; 183–184.Google Scholar
  29. Duboc V, Rottinger E, Besnardeau L, Lepage T (2004) Nodal and BMP2/4 signaling organizes the oral-aboral axis of the sea urchin embryo. Developmental Cell 6: 397–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Erwin DH, Davidson EH (2002) The last common bilaterian ancestor. Development 129: 3021–3032.Google Scholar
  31. Fontana W, Buss LW (1994) What would be conserved if “the tape were played twice”? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 91: 757–761.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Fujiwara A, Kamata Y, Asami K, Yasumasu I (2000) Relationship between ATP level and respiratory rate in sea urchin embryos. Development, Growth and Differentiation 42: 155–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Fujiwara A, Yasumasu I (1997) Does the respiratory rate in sea urchin embryos increase during early development without proliferation of mitochondria? Development, Growth and Differentiation 39: 179–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Goodman AF, Bellato CM, Khidr L (2005) The uncertain future for central dogma. The Scientist 19(12): 20–21.Google Scholar
  35. Gould SJ (2002) The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Hall BK (2000) Evo-devo or devo-evo: Does it matter? Evolution and Development 2: 177–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hardin J, Coffman JA, Black SD, McClay DR (1992) Commitment along the dorsoventral axis of the sea urchin embryo is altered in response to NiCl2. Development 116: 671–685.Google Scholar
  38. Kauffman S (1995) At Home in the Universe. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Keller EF (1999) Elusive locus of control in biological development: Genetic versus developmental programs. Journal of Experimental Zoology (Molecular and Developmental Evolution) 285: 283–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Kirk DL (2005) A twelve-step program for evolving multicellularity and a division of labor. Bioessays 27: 299–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Laland KN, Odling-Smee FJ, Feldman MW (1999) Evolutionary consequences of niche construction and their implications for ecology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 96: 10242–10247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McDonald JW (2004) Repairing the damaged spinal cord: From stem cells to activity-based restoration therapies. Clinical Neurosurgery 51: 207–227.Google Scholar
  43. Murray AW (2000) Whither genomics? Genome Biology 1. http://genomebiolog.com/2000/1/1/comment/003/
  44. Newman SA (2002) Developmental mechanisms: Putting genes in their place. Journal of Biosciences 27: 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Newman SA (2005) The pre-Mendelian, pre-Darwinian world: Shifting relations between genetic and epigenetic mechanisms in early multicellular evolution. Journal of Biosciences 30: 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Newman SA, Müller GB (2000) Epigenetic mechanisms of character origination. Journal of Experimental Zoology B 288: 304–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Nijhout HF (1990) Metaphors and the role of genes in development. Bioessays 12(9): 441–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Nijhout HF (2002) The nature of robustness in development. Bioessays 24: 553–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pease DC (1941) Echinoderm bilateral determination in chemical concentration gradients: I. The effects of cyanide, ferricyanide, iodoacetate, picrate, dinitrophenol, urethane, iodine, malonate, etc. Journal of Experimental Zoology 86: 381–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pease DC (1942a) Echinoderm bilateral determination in chemical concentration gradients: II. The effects of azide, pilocarpine, pyocyanine, diamine, cysteine, glutathione, and lithium. Journal of Experimental Zoology 89: 329–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pease DC (1942b) Echinoderm bilateral deterimination in chemical concentration gradients: III. The effects of carbon monoxide and other gases. Journal of Experimental Zoology 89: 347–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Popper KR (1990) A World of Propensities. Bristol: Thoemmes.Google Scholar
  53. Ransick A, Ernst S, Britten RJ, Davidson EH (1993) Whole mount in situ hybridization shows Endo 16 to be a marker for the vegetal plate territory in sea urchin embryos. Mechanics of Development 42(3): 117–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Reynolds SD, Angerer LM, Palis J, Nasir A, Angerer RC (1992) Early mRNAs, spatially restricted along the animal-vegetal axis of sea urchin embryos, include one encoding a protein related to tolloid and BMP-1. Development 114: 769–786.Google Scholar
  55. Salthe SN (1993) Development and Evolution: Complexity and Change in Biology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  56. Smith E, Morowitz HJ (2004) Universality in intermediary metabolism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 101: 13168–13173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sole RV, Montoya JM, Erwin DH (2002) Recovery after mass extinction: Evolutionary assembly in large-scale biosphere dynamics. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 357: 697–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sonnenschein C, Soto AM (1999) The Society of Cells: Cancer and Control of Cell Proliferation. Oxford: BIOS Scientific.Google Scholar
  59. Soto AM, Sonnenschein C (2004) The somatic mutation theory of cancer: Growing problems with the paradigm? Bioessays 26: 1097–1107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Ulanowicz RE (1986) Growth and Development: Ecosystems Phenomenology. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ulanowicz RE (1997) Ecology: The Ascendent Perspective (Allen TFH, Roberts DW, eds). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Wedlich-Soldner R, Li R (2003) Spontaneous cell polarization: Undermining determinism. Nature Cell Biology 5: 267–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wei Z, Angerer LM, Angerer RC (1997) Multiple positive cis elements regulate the asymmetric expression of the SpHE gene along the sea urchin embryo animal-vegetal axis. Developmental Biology 187: 71–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wei Z, Angerer LM, Gagnon ML, Angerer RC (1995) Characterization of the SpHE promoter that is spatially regulated along the animal-vegetal axis of the sea urchin embryo. Developmental Biology 171: 195–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Weitzel HE, Illies MR, Byrum CA, Xu R, Wikramanayake AH, Ettensohn CA (2004) Differential stability of beta-catenin along the animal-vegetal axis of the sea urchin embryo mediated by dishevelled. Development 131: 2947–2956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Yuh CH, Bolouri H, Davidson EH (2001) Cis-regulatory logic in the endo16 gene: Switching from a specification to a differentiation mode of control. Development 128: 617–629.Google Scholar
  67. Yuh CH, Davidson EH (1996) Modularcis-regulatory organization of Endo16, a gut-specific gene of the sea urchin embryo. Development 122: 1069–1082.Google Scholar
  68. Yuh CH, Dorman ER, Davidson EH (2005) Brn1/2/4, the predicted midgut regulator of the endo16 gene of the sea urchin embryo. Developmental Biology 281: 286–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Yuh CH, Ransick A, Martinez P, Britten RJ, Davidson EH (1994) Complexity and organization of DNA-protein interactions in the 5′ — regulatory region of an endoderm-specific marker gene in the sea urchin embryo. Mechanics of Development 47: 165–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Zeller RW, Cameron RA, Franks RR, Britten RJ, Davidson EH (1992) Territorial expression of three different trans-genes in early sea urchin embryos detected by a whole-mount fluorescence procedure. Developmental Biology 151: 382–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution and Cognition Research 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mount Desert Island Biological LaboratorySalisbury CoveUSA

Personalised recommendations