Effect of chromosomal reorganizations on morphological covariation of the mouse mandible: insights from a Robertsonian system of Mus musculus domesticus

Does divergence from normal patterns of integration increase as chromosomal fusions increase in number? A test on a house mouse hybrid zone

Chromosomal evolution is widely considered an important driver of speciation because it can promote the establishment of reproductive barriers. Karyotypic reorganization is also expected to affect the mean phenotype, as well as its development and patterns of phenotypic integration, through processes such as variation in genetic linkage between quantitative trait loci or between regulatory regions and their targets. Here we explore the relationship between chromosomal evolution and phenotypic integration by analyzing a well-known house mouse parapatric contact zone between a highly derived Robertsonian (Rb) race (2n = 22) and populations with standard karyotype (2n = 40). Populations with hybrid karyotypes are scattered throughout the hybrid zone connecting the two parental races. Using mandible shape data and geometric morphometrics, we test the hypothesis that patterns of integration progressively diverge from the “normal” integration pattern observed in the standard race as they accumulate Rb fusions. We find that the main pattern of integration observed between the posterior and anterior part of the mandible can be largely attributed to allometry. We find no support for a gradual increase in divergence from normal patterns of integration as fusions accumulate. Surprisingly, however, we find that the derived Rb race (2n = 22) has a distinct allometric trajectory compared with the standard race. Our results suggest that either individual fusions disproportionately affect patterns of integration or that there are mechanisms which “purge” extreme variants in hybrids (e.g. reduced fitness of hybrid shape).

Skin mites in mice (Mus musculus): high prevalence of Myobia sp. (Acari, Arachnida) in Robertsonian mice

Myobia sp. and Demodex sp. are two skin mites that infest mice, particularly immunodeficient or transgenic lab mice. In the present study, wild house mice from five localities from the Barcelona Roberstonian system were analysed in order to detect skin mites and compare their prevalence between standard (2n = 40) and Robertsonian mice (2n > 40). We found and identified skin mites through real-time qPCR by comparing sequences from the mitochondrial 16S rRNA and the nuclear 18S rRNA genes since no sequences are available so far using the mitochondrial gene. Fourteen positive samples were identified as Myobia musculi except for a deletion of 296 bp out to 465 bp sequenced, and one sample was identified as Demodex canis. Sampling one body site, the mite prevalence in standard and Robertsonian mice was 0 and 26%, respectively. The malfunction of the immune system elicits an overgrowth of skin mites and consequently leads to diseases such as canine demodicosis in dogs or rosacea in humans. In immunosuppressed mice, the probability of developing demodicosis is higher than in healthy mice. Since six murine toll-like receptors (TLRs) are located in four chromosomes affected by Robertsonian fusions, we cannot dismiss that differences in mite prevalence could be the consequence of the interruption of TLR function. Although ecological and/or morphological factors cannot be disregarded to explain differences in mite prevalence, the detection of translocation breakpoints in TLR genes or the analysis of TLR gene expression are needed to elucidate how Robertsonian fusions affect the immune system in mice.

Multimethod Approach to the Early Postnatal Growth of the Mandible in Mice from a Zone of Robertsonian Polymorphism

The western European house mouse (Mus musculus domesticus) shows high karyotypic diversity owing to Robertsonian translocations. Morphometric studies conducted with adult mice suggest that karyotype evolution due to these chromosomal reorganizations entails variation in the form and the patterns of morphological covariation of the mandible. However, information is much scarcer regarding the effect of these rearrangements on the growth pattern of the mouse mandible over early postnatal ontogeny. Here we compare mandible growth from the second to the eighth week of postnatal life between two ontogenetic series of mice from wild populations, with the standard karyotype and with Robertsonian translocations respectively, reared under the same conditions. A multi-method approach is used, including bone histology analyses of mandible surfaces and cross-sections, as well as geometric morphometric analyses of mandible form. The mandibles of both standard and Robertsonian mice display growth acceleration around weaning, anteroposterior direction of bone maturation, a predominance of bone deposition fields over ontogeny, and relatively greater expansion of the posterior mandible region correlated with the ontogenetic increase in mandible size. Nevertheless, differences exist between the two mouse groups regarding the timing of histological maturation of the mandible, the localization of certain bone remodeling fields, the temporospatial patterns of morphological variation, and the organization into two main modules. The dissimilarities in the process of mandible growth between the two groups of mice become more evident around sexual maturity, and could arise from alterations that Robertsonian translocations may exert on genes involved in the bone remodeling mechanism. Anat Rec, 2018. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Drosophila wing modularity revisited through a quantitative genetic approach

To predict the response of complex morphological structures to selection it is necessary to know how the covariation among its different parts is organized. Two key features of covariation are modularity and integration. The Drosophila wing is currently considered a fully integrated structure. Here, we study the patterns of integration of the Drosophila wing and test the hypothesis of the wing being divided into two modules along the proximo-distal axis, as suggested by developmental, biomechanical, and evolutionary evidence. To achieve these goals we perform a multilevel analysis of covariation combining the techniques of geometric morphometrics and quantitative genetics. Our results indicate that the Drosophila wing is indeed organized into two main modules, the wing base and the wing blade. The patterns of integration and modularity were highly concordant at the phenotypic, genetic, environmental, and developmental levels. Besides, we found that modularity at the developmental level was considerably higher than modularity at other levels, suggesting that in the Drosophila wing direct developmental interactions are major contributors to total phenotypic shape variation. We propose that the precise time at which covariance-generating developmental processes occur and/or the magnitude of variation that they produce favor proximo-distal, rather than anterior-posterior, modularity in the Drosophila wing.

Size, shape, and form: concepts of allometry in geometric morphometrics

Allometry refers to the size-related changes of morphological traits and remains an essential concept for the study of evolution and development. This review is the first systematic comparison of allometric methods in the context of geometric morphometrics that considers the structure of morphological spaces and their implications for characterizing allometry and performing size correction. The distinction of two main schools of thought is useful for understanding the differences and relationships between alternative methods for studying allometry. The Gould-Mosimann school defines allometry as the covariation of shape with size. This concept of allometry is implemented in geometric morphometrics through the multivariate regression of shape variables on a measure of size. In the Huxley-Jolicoeur school, allometry is the covariation among morphological features that all contain size information. In this framework, allometric trajectories are characterized by the first principal component, which is a line of best fit to the data points. In geometric morphometrics, this concept is implemented in analyses using either Procrustes form space or conformation space (the latter also known as size-and-shape space). Whereas these spaces differ substantially in their global structure, there are also close connections in their localized geometry. For the model of small isotropic variation of landmark positions, they are equivalent up to scaling. The methods differ in their emphasis and thus provide investigators with flexible tools to address specific questions concerning evolution and development, but all frameworks are logically compatible with each other and therefore unlikely to yield contradictory results.

Size, shape, and form: concepts of allometry in geometric morphometrics

Allometry refers to the size-related changes of morphological traits and remains an essential concept for the study of evolution and development. This review is the first systematic comparison of allometric methods in the context of geometric morphometrics that considers the structure of morphological spaces and their implications for characterizing allometry and performing size correction. The distinction of two main schools of thought is useful for understanding the differences and relationships between alternative methods for studying allometry. The Gould–Mosimann school defines allometry as the covariation of shape with size. This concept of allometry is implemented in geometric morphometrics through the multivariate regression of shape variables on a measure of size. In the Huxley–Jolicoeur school, allometry is the covariation among morphological features that all contain size information. In this framework, allometric trajectories are characterized by the first principal component, which is a line of best fit to the data points. In geometric morphometrics, this concept is implemented in analyses using either Procrustes form space or conformation space (the latter also known as size-and-shape space). Whereas these spaces differ substantially in their global structure, there are also close connections in their localized geometry. For the model of small isotropic variation of landmark positions, they are equivalent up to scaling. The methods differ in their emphasis and thus provide investigators with flexible tools to address specific questions concerning evolution and development, but all frameworks are logically compatible with each other and therefore unlikely to yield contradictory results.

Chromosomal rearrangements, phenotypic variation and modularity: a case study from a contact zone between house mouse Robertsonian races in Central Italy

The Western European house mouse, Mus musculus domesticus, is well‐known for the high frequency of Robertsonian fusions that have rapidly produced more than 50 karyotipic races, making it an ideal model for studying the mechanisms of chromosomal speciation. The mouse mandible is one of the traits studied most intensively to investigate the effect of Robertsonian fusions on phenotypic variation within and between populations. This complex bone structure has also been widely used to study the level of integration between different morphogenetic units. Here, with the aim of testing the effect of different karyotypic assets on the morphology of the mouse mandible and on its level of modularity, we performed morphometric analyses of mice from a contact area between two highly metacentric races in Central Italy. We found no difference in size, while the mandible shape was found to be different between the two Robertsonian races, even after accounting for the genetic relationships among individuals and geographic proximity. Our results support the existence of two modules that indicate a certain degree of evolutionary independence, but no difference in the strength of modularity between chromosomal races. Moreover, the ascending ramus showed more pronounced interpopulation/race phenotypic differences than the alveolar region, an effect that could be associated to their different polygenic architecture. This study suggests that chromosomal rearrangements play a role in the house mouse phenotypic divergence, and that the two modules of the mouse mandible are differentially affected by environmental factors and genetic makeup.