Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

The rise of evo‐devo: Pan‐American Society for Evolutionary Developmental Biology sets the stage

2016; Wiley; Volume: 103; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.3732/ajb.1500441

1537-2197

Chelsea D. Specht,

Plant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics

On 5–9 August 2015, the newly formed Pan-American Society for Evolutionary Development Biology held its first meeting on the Clark Kerr campus of the University of California, Berkeley. The Society emerged as an outcome of a 2013 NSF-funded workshop organized by Dr. Cassandra Extavour (Harvard University) and Dr. Allen Rodrigo (NESCent). The goal of the workshop was to explore and define the future of evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo) as an integrative scientific discipline, with its own specific intellectual goals and biological questions, and to define initiatives to advance collaborative research, education, infrastructure development, training and outreach related to furthering the study of evo-devo (Moczek et al., 2015). The society was officially established during this workshop, with a mission to promote the study of evo-devo in all organisms and provide a forum for establishing tools for collaboration, communication, and education in the field of evo-devo and a commitment to excellence, equity, and diversity. The first meeting—organized by the Society's President Ehab Abouheif, Vice President Karen Sears, and local organizers Nipam Patel and Chris Lowe—served to further this mission and highlight this commitment. The meeting, which was attended by 163 faculty, 59 postdoctoral researchers, and 106 student members of the Society, was organized around a strong lineup of invited speakers—an international group of men and women who are engaged in research investigating the foundations of developmental evolution from both theoretical and experimental perspectives. The presented research incorporated diverse organisms, and the speakers spanned all career stages. This meeting was one of the first where the "plant" and "animal" researchers did not retreat to their own sessions, but rather talks flowed seamlessly. Topics included the evolution of gene regulatory networks, evolution of form and function, and patterning and plasticity in plants, invertebrates, and vertebrates; evolution of multicellular and unicellular organisms; and developmental patterning in extinct and extant lineages. It was a meeting of researchers united by a common interest in developmental evolution and those areas of research addressing the genotypic causation underlying the evolution of shared and derived phenotypes. With few parallel sessions, barriers typically found among subdisciplines were eliminated, and attendees shared ideas and discussed details of plenary talks and workshops. Whereas the animal evo-devo community has traditionally participated in meetings held by organizations such as the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology (SICB), providing an opportunity to assemble and share evo-devo research, the plant evo-devo community has not reached a critical mass at any single botanical meeting, resulting in a division of the community. On a yearly basis, plant evo-devo researchers self-select among evolution and organismal diversity-based meetings (e.g., botany, evolution) and model system-based developmental biology meetings (e.g., American Society of Plant Biologists; FASEB Mechanisms in Plant Development; Society for Developmental Biology). A common ground where plant biologists can discuss the methods, philosophy, and theory inherent to evo-devo has been lacking. The Pan-American Society for Evolutionary Developmental Biology (PanAmEvoDevo or PASEDB) fills that void, as demonstrated by the success of this meeting. In fact, in a report on The Node (http://thenode.biologists.com/meeting-report-pan-evo-devos-first-meeting/news/), vertebrate biologist Dr. Tamara Franz-Odendaal and invertebrate biologist Allison Edgar (graduate student at Duke University) both commented on the integrative nature of the meeting, specifically stating how much they enjoyed hearing "the plant talks" and how these talks sparked their interest in plant diversity and developmental evolution. As such, the society and its inaugural meeting formed a bridge among all evo-devo biologists and brought plant research into the fold of methodological, technological, and philosophical innovations that are shaping evo-devo biology today. Nelima Sinha (University of California, Davis) gave one of the introductory keynote addresses, starting off the meeting with an excellent example of how plant-specific studies share approaches common across evo-devo research. Sinha provided the audience with a clear and concise understanding of the role of gene regulatory networks in moderating leaf development, presenting the leaf as a key innovation in land plant diversification and as a model organ to analyze the mechanisms underlying morphological diversification and adaptation. Focusing on the natural diversity of leaves inherent to the Solanum genus, and using transcriptomic approaches combined with self-organizing map clustering, Sinha and her group have characterized the gene expression patterns underlying differential leaf development and have been able to model how different gene regulatory networks (GRNs) evolve to generate the natural diversity of leaf form. Richard Palmer (University of Alberta) used both plant and animal systems to give an insightful presentation on the sources of new variation within populations, investigating the role of developmental plasticity and using variation in asymmetry within and among species to explore these concepts. Through his investigation of the development and evolution of "handedness" and asymmetries in various bilaterians and in orchid flowers, Palmer's research promises to yield insights into the genetic and developmental mechanisms underlying the evolution of asymmetry. This research could be applied to understanding mechanisms of floral symmetry as well as processes underlying phyllotaxis and its evolution across land plants. Following Palmer was Joceyln Hall (University of Alberta) discussing the basis of floral variation in Cleome. Hall provided a colorful introduction to the diversity of flower morphology in Cleomaceae and compared this diversity with the limited flower diversity, yet high fruit morphological diversity, in the sister family Brassicaceae. Hall went on to discuss the role of the TCP genes in floral symmetry, in particular focusing on their role in the development of differences in petal color and shape. She also touched on their novel role in the formation of a large adaxial nectary gland, which generates monosymmetric flowers. Other plenary talks by an impressive international cohort of plant evolutionary and developmental biologists continued over the second and third days of the meeting. Angela Hay (Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research) spoke on the morphomechanical innovations driving explosive seed dispersal in Cardamine hirsuta and engaged the audience on the intricacies of plant movement (did you know that the fruit valves work like "slap bracelets"?!). James Umen (Donald Danforth Plant Science Center) discussed the coevolution of sexes and multicellularity in volvocine algae. Stacey D. Smith (University of Colorado, Boulder) discussed the mechanisms of flower color convergence across multiple evolutionary time scales, and Vivian Irish (Yale University) investigated "a thorny question" by showing how thorns can evolve in plants via development of a novel mode of arrested cell division. The first Early Career Award from the Society went to Natalia Pabón-Mora of the Universidad de Antioquia, Medellin, Colombia. Pabón-Mora received her Ph.D. in 2012 from the City University of New York as part of the New York Botanical Garden's graduate program and has been on the faculty at the University de Angioquia for the past 3 years. Dr. Pabón-Mora provided an engaging overview the history of the ABC model and its role in understanding plant development, emphasizing how distantly related some of the various plant lineages are that we are trying to compare and how challenging homology statements—among genes and among structures—can be. She honed in on the role of gene duplication in flowering plant diversification, in particular how gene duplications in key gene families have played a role in the evolution of the morphological diversity found in the flowers of the family Aristolochiaceae. Pabón-Mora brought five students to the meeting, both undergraduates and graduates, and their posters and presentations throughout the meeting demonstrated the excellence of the research, teaching, and training program she has developed at the Universidad de Antioquia. With most of the invited and contributed papers held as plenary sessions, the bulk of the meeting was attended by all conference attendees, making conversations over meals and during breaks very community-oriented. One morning featured four concurrent sessions, with 24 contributed papers carefully selected from over 200 submitted abstracts. Nationality, gender, and career stage were all taken into consideration as the best abstracts were selected. The five selected speakers who spoke on topics of plant evo-devo ranged in career stage from an undergraduate researcher to two recently hired junior faculty, hailed from institutions in Kansas, California, Mexico, and Colombia, and included research on eudicots, monocots, seed plants, and cell–cell interactions. The first of these speakers, Carolyn Wessinger (University of Kansas), described her use of QTL data to investigate the genetic mechanisms and directionality underlying parallel shifts from bee to hummingbird pollination in Penstemon, concluding that a gain of hummingbird pollination may be easy to achieve genetically but may be difficult to reverse. Evangeline Bellerini (University of California Santa Barbara) likewise used a QTL approach, in this case to identify the genomic regions controlling variation in species-specific traits such as flower color and nectar spur length in Aquilegia. Alma Piñeyro-Nelson (University of California, Berkeley) discussed the potential role of the F-box gene UNUSUAL FLORAL ORGANS (UFO) in differential petal and stamen development across monocots, while Cecilia Zumajo Cardona, an undergraduate researcher (University of Antioquia, Medellin), presented her work on the role of APETALA2 gene duplication and subsequent shifts in expression patterns during the evolution of angiosperms, characterizing novel protein motifs, and identifying genes that have lost their miR172 binding sites. Finally, Marianna Benitez (Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, UNAM) provided a thought-provoking analysis of the organization of multicellular aggregates of plant cells, combining mathematical models and theory to investigate the role of physiochemical processes on the formation and patterning of multicellular structures. The poster session was a central focus of the meeting, with over 180 posters presented by students, postdocs, and faculty in all areas—from data to theory and laboratory techniques to bioinformatic modeling. Posters were not grouped topically, encouraging general browsing across the session. I identified 18 posters by botanists and evolutionary plant biologists from all career stages, from professor to undergraduate researcher. David Baum (University of Wisconsin, Madison) presented a poster that provided a theoretical framework for identifying the role of selection in the evolution of development, providing a mechanism for defining homology in a way that is independent of perceived similarities and presenting fresh perspectives on developmental constraints, selection, and fitness. Benjamin Blackman (University of Virginia) used the poster session to update the community on his work investigating the developmental basis of seasonal cues in Mimulus, demonstrating how copy number variation plays a role in geographic divergence and developmental plasticity. Topics of student and postdoctoral posters largely focused on understanding phenotypic and developmental aspects of floral biology, leaf and lateral organ morphology, and the evolution of adaptive traits such as vernalization and cold tolerance (Table 1). Common themes throughout the poster session included the evolution of gene regulatory networks and their role in morphological diversification and the emerging experimental role of transcriptomics and expression analyses in investigating the origins and evolution of novel physiological traits and morphological structures. The panel was composed of six junior and midcareer faculty, including Dr. Lena Hileman, plant evolutionary biologist from the University of Kansas. Held from 8 to 10 pm on Friday night, the panel packed the Krutch Theater, including the balcony, to capacity. Opening the floor to the community, questions for the panelists ranged from appropriate use of funding to how to educate the public and other scientists about evo-devo. It was clear from the discussion that the future of evo-devo as a discipline requires increased communication within the evo-devo community as well as those in other scientific disciplines who can learn and benefit from an evo-devo perspective, with students who can be drawn into the field, and with the public who might not understand how much human livelihood benefits from evo-devo research (e.g., medicine and agriculture). As one attendee noted during the discussion, we are not a marginal field any longer, neither philosophically nor technically; comparative evo-devo research successfully extends across different hierarchies of organismal diversification and can address key genetic, genomic, and environmental aspects of trait evolution. Pulling from a poster-board of issues, thoughts, and ideas that attendees were encouraged to post throughout the meeting, the panel discussion worked to address fundamental questions such as: "What are the big questions for evo-devo research?" "How do we integrate population level questions with more traditional macro-evolutionary approaches?" Attendees were also invited to look at how they linked to one another through their research expertise and interests (Fig. 1). Panelist Lena Hileman stated "[I] saw groups of people deeply engaged in discussion over these sorts of questions outside, after the panel, and I am pretty certain those discussions went on for a long time over beers, etc." In this way, the panel functioned to introduce the broad audience to specific areas of disciplinary interest and helped individuals to identify potential collaborators for moving forward in developing synthetic evo-devo research programs. Public poster boards were set up for attendees to post comments throughout the duration of the meeting. This poster board asked researchers to connect their areas of research, demonstrating overlap of research programs and providing fodder for conversation among researchers with similar or complementary areas of interest. On the second evening, parallel worships were held on evo-devo education, Latin American challenges in evo-devo, new and developing tools for emerging model organisms, theory, and diversity and mentoring. These workshops provided mechanisms to determine how the society could best fill a gap in providing information and facilitating technology transfer and collaborations to ease some of the challenges associated with developing model systems. During the theory workshop, the speakers stressed that evo-devo theory is about the nonlinear relationship between genotype and phenotype and demonstrated how this shapes the potential for evolution. The workshop highlighted the emerging challenge that gene-regulatory-network diagrams are not adequate to support theory; for that, one also needs detailed temporal and spatial quantitative information. Discussions also touched on tools for developing models of gene network evolution and formats for distributing and sharing theory-based protocols and practices. The teaching workshop directly addressed the development of online and shared tools for teaching evo-devo at undergraduate and graduate levels, while the diversity and mentoring workshop discussed mechanisms for increasing diversity within the evo-devo field and also best practices for mentoring students from diverse backgrounds. Results from the workshops are posted on the society website, and new permanent council positions were voted into place to ensure that the issues raised concerning equity and inclusion, technology transfer, and education during some of these sessions will continue to be at the forefront of the mission of the society. During lunch and session breaks, the Society held informal gatherings for self-identified members of under-represented groups: people of color, LGBTQ folk, women, and people with disabilities. These informal gatherings were hosted by council members, and welcomed anyone who identified as a member of or advocate for the group in question. The goal was to open dialog and provide a safe place to discuss issues and build social and scientific networks with other scientists who have similar experiences or who are interested in recognizing societal challenges and advocating for change. This first meeting of evo-devo biologists highlighted several unique aspects of evo-devo as a discipline. Through this inaugural meeting, we have found common ground as a group of scientists motivated by fundamental concepts in evolutionary biology and by the ability to use increasingly complex tools to more fully explore the patterns and processes underlying the diversity of life. Our field brings together amazing organisms and fantastic facts that together can explain the diversity of forms and functions that we see on Earth and can be used to test both the universality and the uniqueness of underlying developmental patterns and processes. Finally, PanAmEvoDevo as a society is functioning to organize a highly integrated network of researchers engaged and invested in teaching and training the next generation of scientists to advance the study of the genetic and evolutionary mechanisms that generate diversity of form. The author thanks David Baum and Pamela Diggle for constructive comments on this letter, Lena Hileman for comments on the panel and for her personal insights that were woven into the concluding paragraph, and the Associate Editor and two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments. The author also acknowledges the efforts of Karen Sears, Pamela Diggle, and Pierre Kerner in tweeting prolifically throughout the conference, providing a long-term record of the proceedings. For more information, check out #evodevo15 and www.evodevopanam.org.