Добавил:
Upload Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:

Biology_of_Turtles

.pdf
Скачиваний:
88
Добавлен:
11.02.2015
Размер:
44.64 Mб
Скачать

About the Editors

versity of Mons (Belgium) and the Muséum (master’s degree program and doctoral school), Dr. Bels’s studies concern a large variety of lower vertebrates from a comparative, functional, and evolutionary point of view. His main work focuses on feeding behavior in squamates and turtles. He has studied locomotor behavior in a number of lower vertebrates including fishes, crocodiles, and marine turtles. He has also investigated behavioral and functional mechanisms of behaviors involved in communication in squamates. He is active in the peer-review process for a number of journals. Dr. Bels has authored more than 50 peer-reviewed papers, five book chapters, and edited or co-edited three books on the functional and evolutionary biology of vertebrates.

Contributors

Peter Aerts

Department of Biology

University of Antwerp

Antwerp, Belgium

Ignacio Barandalla

Department of Animal Biology

University of Barcelona

Barcelona, Spain

Sabine Baussart

Département Ecologie et Gestion de la Biodiversité

Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle Paris, France

Vincent Bels

Département Ecologie et Gestion de la Biodiversité

Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle Paris, France

Richard W. Blob

Department of Biological Sciences

Clemson University

Clemson, South Carolina, USA

Ann C. Burke

Biology Department

Wesleyan University

Middletown, Connecticut, USA

Adrià Casinos

Department of Animal Biology

University of Barcelona

Barcelona, Spain

Judith A. Cebra-Thomas

Biology Department

Millersville University

Millersville, Pennsylvania, USA

John Davenport

Department of Zoology, Ecology and Plant

Science

Environmental Research Institute

University College Cork

Cork, Ireland

Julia L. Davenport

Department of Zoology, Ecology and Plant

Science

Environmental Research Institute

University College Cork

Cork, Ireland

Marion Depecker

Département Ecologie et Gestion de la Biodiversité

Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle Paris, France

Stephen A. Dinkelacker

Department of Biology

University of Central Arkansas

Conway, Arkansas, USA

Scott F. Gilbert

Biology Department

Swarthmore College

Swarthmore, Pennsylvania, USA

Marc Girondot

Laboratoire des Reptiles et Amphibiens Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle Paris, France

Matthew H. Godfrey

North Carolina Wildlife Resources

Commission

Beaufort, North Carolina, USA

xi

xii

Jean-Michel Guillon

Laboratoire Ecologie, Systématique et Evolution

Faculté des Sciences d’Orsay Université Paris Sud

Orsay, France

Anthony Herrel

Department of Biology

University of Antwerp

Antwerp, Belgium

Vincent Hulin

Laboratoire Ecologie, Systématique et Evolution

Faculté des Sciences d’Orsay Université Paris Sud

Orsay, France

France de Lapparent de Broin

Département Histoire de la Terre, Paléobiodiversité

Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle Paris, France

Gustavo A. Llorente

Department of Animal Biology

University of Barcelona

Barcelona, Spain

Jeffrey D. Miller

Department of Biology

University of Central Arkansas

Conway, Arkansas, USA

Sarah L. Milton

Department of Biological Sciences

Florida Atlantic University

Boca Raton, Florida, USA

Ruth M. O’Riordan

Department of Zoology, Ecology and Plant

Science

Environmental Research Institute

University College Cork

Cork, Ireland

Peter C.H. Pritchard

Chelonian Research Institute

Oviedo, Florida, USA

Contributors

Sabine Renous

Département Ecologie et Gestion de la Biodiversité

Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle Paris, France

Anders G.J. Rhodin

Chelonian Research Foundation

Lunenburg, Massachusetts, USA

Olivier Rieppel

Department of Geology

Field Museum of Natural History

Chicago, Illinois, USA

Angela R.V. Rivera

Department of Biological Sciences

Clemson University

Clemson, South Carolina, USA

Xavier Ruiz

Department of Animal Biology

University of Barcelona

Barcelona, Spain

Marc Shorten

Department of Zoology, Ecology and Plant

Science

Environmental Research Institute

University College Cork

Cork, Ireland

Melissa L. Snover

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA)

National Marine Fisheries Service

Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center

Honolulu, Hawaii, USA

Johan Van Damme

Department of Biology

University of Antwerp

Antwerp, Belgium

Carles Viladiu

Department of Animal Biology

University of Barcelona

Barcelona, Spain

Contributors

xiii

Mark W. Westneat

Jeanette Wyneken

Department of Zoology

Department of Biological Sciences

Field Museum of Natural History

Florida Atlantic University

Chicago, Illinois, USA

Boca Raton, Florida, USA

1 How the Turtle Gets Its Shell

Scott F. Gilbert, Judith A. Cebra-Thomas, and Ann C. Burke

If it weren’t for the 250 species of turtles living today … these animals encased in mobile homes could easily be viewed as bizarre evolutionary experiments that were ordained to failure.

Richard Ellis (2003)

Contents

1.1

The Nature of the Turtle Shell.................................................................................................

1

 

1.1.1

Introduction to the Turtle Shell....................................................................................

1

 

1.1.2

Anatomy of the Turtle Shell.........................................................................................

2

1.2

The Formation of the Carapacial Bones: Heterotopy and Paracrine Factors..........................

2

 

1.2.1

The Dermal Bones of the Carapace.............................................................................

2

 

1.2.2

Formation of the Carapace...........................................................................................

4

 

 

1.2.2.1 The Carapacial Ridge and the Entry of the Ribs into the Dermis..................

4

 

 

1.2.2.2 Costal Bones: The Ossification of the Carapace.............................................

5

 

 

1.2.2.3 The Nuchal and Peripheral Bones of the Carapace........................................

6

1.3

The Formation of the Plastron Bones: Heterochrony and Neural Crest Cells........................

8

 

1.3.1

Dermal Bones of the Plastron.......................................................................................

8

 

1.3.2

Ossification of the Plastron...........................................................................................

8

 

 

1.3.2.1 Development of the Plastron Bones................................................................

8

 

1.3.3

Roles of Neural Crest Cells in Plastron and Nuchal Bone Development...................

10

1.4

Evolutionary Implications......................................................................................................

12

Acknowledgments............................................................................................................................

13

References.........................................................................................................................................

 

13

1.1The Nature Of The Turtle Shell

1.1.1Introduction to the Turtle Shell

The turtle shell is a remarkable evolutionary novelty that defines the order Chelonia. The turtle shell is found in three general forms based on the nature and degree of ossification: hardshells, softshells, and leatherbacks. This section will concentrate almost totally on the bony component of those shells of the hardback turtles of the Emys and Chelydae families. This shell is composed of two main parts, the dorsal carapace and the ventral plastron, connected along the midflanks by lateral bridges. Altogether, the shell contains over 50 dermal bones that are homologous to no other bone in any other vertebrate order. Moreover, the presence of this bony casing has necessitated extensive modifications of the tetrapod body plan (Zangerl, 1969). Whereas dermal ossification itself is a primitive character for vertebrates (Smith & Hall, 1993), the turtle shell represents an extreme development of the dermal skeleton among tetrapods.

The shell clearly has adaptive value for turtles as physical protection, but it also serves physiological functions in different species as a site of hematopoiesis, a reservoir for water, fat, or wastes,

 

Biology of Turtles

and a buffer for pH. The embryonic development of the shell involves a dramatic hypertrophy of the dermis in the dorsal body wall and a resultant rearrangement of the typical relationship between the pectoral girdle and the axial skeleton. Thus, turtles are the only vertebrates whose limbs are found deep to the ribs. The paraxial and limb-girdle musculature—the neck and skull—are also greatly modified. As we detail here, the key innovation for the chelonians appears to be the carapacial ridge, a bulge of ectoderm and mesoderm that influences the growth of the ribs (Burke, 1989a). The ribs are enveloped within the dorsal dermis, resulting in their lateral displacement as the dermis rapidly expands. Thus instead of extending ventrally and enclosing the thoracic cavity, the turtle ribs become integrated into the carapacial dermis. The neural arches of the vertebrae also fuse with the midline of the carapace. As the anonymous author (1676) of the letter to the Royal Society of London wrote in 1676:

“The Anatomie of a Tortoise, showing that what were the Ribs in other Animals one upper Shell is in the Tortoise, and that to that upper Shell are firmly fastened the spinal Vertebrae, so that the Animal cannot go out of its Home, as Snails do.”

1.1.2Anatomy of the Turtle Shell

The character and homology of the bony elements of the turtle shell have a long history of controversy. The shell is comprised of the endochondral axial elements of the trunk overlaid by a mosaic of dermal bones and an outer epidermal layer made of keratinous scales (also called scutes or shields). All turtles possess 10 trunk vertebrae associated with the carapace. Each vertebra possesses a single-headed rib that often shares an articulation with the next anterior vertebra. The first and tenth ribs are diminutive and normally extend a short distance before making contact with the second and ninth ribs, respectively. The tenth rib is often indistinguishable in both embryos and adults, but the presence of a large tenth rib in embryos is a normal variation. The thoracic ribs enter the dermis of the shell a short distance from their articulation with the vertebrae, and they extend laterally within the carapacial dermis, terminating at the periphery (reviewed by Zangerl, 1969).

In the dermal layer of the shell, there are generally 59 bones: the carapace has 38 paired and 12 or 13 unpaired bones (sometimes the suprepygeal bone is divided and sometimes it is not). The plastron contains one unpaired and eight paired bones. With the exception of a few key taxa, the only real variations in this general scheme occur as individual variations around the neck and tail where the axial skeleton is not closely joined to the carapace. The shapes and relative sizes of the bones determine the general form of the shell in different genera.

The shell’s epidermal layer generally consists of 38 scutes in the carapace and 16 in the plastron. However, this can vary depending on the shape of the shell (domed, hinged, flapped, and so on; see Chapter 3). The shield and bone patterns are not in register; each shield covers a particular area of the bony mosaic. The pattern of the sulci that form between neighboring scutes and the sutures that form between neighboring bones form two minimally overlapping patterns. The epidermal shield pattern develops long before the shell bones begin to ossify, and the underlying dermis may play a major role in the formation of the epidermal scutes, similar to the influence of somitic dermis of feather patterns in the chick (Yntema, 1970; Cherepanov, 1989; Alibardi & Thompson, 1999a,b).

1.2The Formation of the Carapacial Bones: Heterotopy and Paracrine Factors

1.2.1The Dermal Bones of the Carapace

The unpaired midline dermal bones of the carapace, called neurals, are fused with the neural spines of the 10 thoracic vertebrae (Figure 1.1). The costal bones extend from the neurals toward the periphery. There are eight pairs and each is intimately associated with a rib (Figure 1.1E). Generally, there is a one-to-one correspondence between the vertebral spines and the neural bones, and

How the Turtle Gets Its Shell

 

peripheral

nuchal

1costal

neural

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

5

5

6

6

7

 

7

8

8

 

 

pygial

 

suprapygial

Figure 1.1Development of the carapace. (A). Entry of cartilaginous rib precursor (arrow) into carapacial ridge of Trachemys embryo around stage 16. The following show bone formation in Trachemys scripta, stained with Alcian blue (cartilage) and alizarin red (bone). (B) 1.2-cm embryo showing cartilaginous ribs forming the outline of the shell. (C). Ventral view of 3.1-cm carapace, showing intramembranous ossification of the nuchal bone and around and in the anterior ribs. (D) Lateral view of the same carapace, showing region of rib chondrogenic growth (blue, arrow) and transition zone (white) between cartilage and bone (red). (E) Dorsal view of 118-day (CL = 3.1 cm) hatchling carapace showing expanded nuchal bone region, the fusion of the anterior costal ossification centers, and the peripheral bone ossification centers that start anteriorly. The pigmentation of the epidermal scutes can be seen. (F) Dorsal view of 185-day (CL = 4.5 cm) hatchling carapace showing fusion of marginal ossification regions anteriorly, as well as the pygal ossification center posteriorly. The costal ossification centers have created bony armor dorsally (the blue staining is beneath the carapace). (G) Predominant pattern of the adult carapacial bones. (Modified from Gilbert et al., 2001; G modified from Zangerl, 1969.)

between the ribs and the costal bones of the carapace. This relationship does not hold in the anterior and posterior ends of the shell, where the vertebral centra are shortened and have little or no contact with the shell. The first costal bone overlies ribs one and two, and the eighth overlies ribs nine and ten (variants have nine pairs of costal bones). The pygal and suprapygal bones form the rear of the carapace. These bones have no contact with vertebra and ribs but project over the sacrum and pelvis. The peripheral bones form the edge of the carapace. There are generally 11 pairs of peripheral bones; before making contact with the costals, they form a socket around the distal tip of ribs two through nine. The nuchal bone forms the anterior margin of the carapace, which overhangs but is not attached to the posterior cervical vertebra. This bone extends laterally around the margins of the carapace to the level of the second rib. It is overlaid by the first three peripheral bones laterally and contacts the first costals and neural bone posteriorly. Each of the carapacial bones is connected

 

Biology of Turtles

by sutures to its neighbors. The distal edge of each costal is attached by suture to the peripheral bones. This contact often does not occur until later stages of post-hatching growth, leaving open a peripheral ring of fontanels that surround the distal tips of the ribs.

Sections across the carapaces of adult turtles show a three-layered arrangement of the bone. The central portion of the bone is a spongy layer containing spherical cavities. On either side of the spongy layer are layers of more compact lamellar bone. This compact bone is thought to form beneath the inner and outer periosteal membranes. The shapes and relative sizes of these bony regions determine the general form of the shell in different genera (Yntema, 1970; Ewert, 1985; Cherepanov, 1997).

1.2.2Formation of the Carapace

1.2.2.1 The Carapacial Ridge and the Entry of the Ribs into the Dermis

The formation of the carapace involves several steps. The first concerns the entry of the rib precursor cells into the dermis. The turtle egg is laid at the mid-gastrula stage. Turtle gastrulation has not been studied in detail for almost eight decades and presents an interesting contrast to the wellstudied avian system (see review; Gilland & Burke, 2004). Later stages of nerulation and somite formation are similar to those processes in the chick (Ewert, 1985; Pasteels, 1937, 1957). The first sign that the organism is to become a turtle rather than some other tetrapod occurs at Yntema stage 14/Greenbaum stage 15 (Yntema, 1968—stages are for Chelydra; Greenbaum, 2002—stages are for Trachemys. Stage 14/15 is approximately equivalent to Hamburger–Hamilton chick stage 24). At this stage are the first signs of ridges on the lateral surfaces of the embryo, dorsal to the limb buds (Ruckes, 1929). At first, these ridges are seen between the two limb buds, and only later do the ridges extend anteriorly and posteriorly. This structure has been named the carapacial ridge (CR) (Burke, 1989b, 1989c, 1991), and the paired carapacial ridges will eventually form the outer edge of the carapace. The CR is formed by a thickening of the ectoderm and is underlaid by a condensed somite-derived mesenchyme (Yntema, 1970; Burke, 1989b, 1989c; Nagashima et al., 2005).

Ruckes’ (1929) observations of turtle embryos described two important features of turtle shell development. First, there is an accelerated lateral growth of the dorsal dermis of the trunk compared to growth in the dorso-ventral plane. Second, there is an apparent ‘‘ensnarement’’ of the growing ribs by the dermis. The involvement of the ribs with the carapacial dermis results in their growth in a predominantly lateral direction (Figure 1.1A). The limb girdles develop in typical tetrapod fashion but because of the growth trajectory of the ribs, the pectoral girdle becomes ventral and deep to the axial elements. Yntema (1970) performed a series of somite extirpation experiments on snapping turtles, confirming a somitic origin for the ribs and dermis of the carapace. Post-otic somite pairs 12 through 21 are involved in forming the carapace in Chelydra.

In 1989, Burke proposed that the thickened ectoderm and condensed mesenchyme of the CR is typical of sites of epithelial-mesenchymal interactions. The distributions of the cell adhesion proteins fibronectin and N-CAM in the CR are similar to their locations in other inductive sites such as the early limb bud or feather primordia. Burke (1991) tested the causal relationship between the CR and the growth trajectory of the ribs. In the first set of experiments, she removed the CR by tungsten needles from one side of stage 1 through stage 16 embryos. These extirpations included both ectodermal and mesenchymal components. In those cases where the CR did not regenerate, the growth trajectory of the rib was deflected toward a neighboring region that did have a CR. In a second set of experiments, she placed tantalum barriers between the somite and the presumptive CR. The surviving embryos showed disruptions such that where the CR was interrupted, entire regions of the dermal carapace were missing. The ribs associated with these missing regions interdigitated with those bones of the plastron. Burke concluded that the normal development of the ribs appears to be directed by the CR. In the absence of the CR, these ribs project ventrally into the lateral plate mesoderm like the ribs of non-Chelonian vertebrates.

How the Turtle Gets Its Shell

 

Loredo and colleagues (2001) were the first to analyze the CR with molecular probes and found fibroblast growth factor-10 (FGF-10) expression in the mesenchyme condensed beneath the Trachemys CR. Fibroblast growth factors are paracrine factors that are critical in the patterning, migration, and differentiation of numerous cell types, and they are especially important in determining the fates of cells in the face and in the limbs. Vincent and coworkers (2003) found the turtle homologue of transcription factor msx1 is expressed in the mesenchyme of the Emys CR. This result furthered the notion that the CR was made through mesenchymal/epithelial interactions similar to those that generate the limb bud. The Wnt signaling pathway is used in several embryonic inductions and can mediate the effects of fibroblast growth factors (in the limb bud). By using RT-PCR, Kuraku and colleagues (2005) found turtle orthologs of Sp5 and Wnt targets APDCC-1 and LEF-1 in the CR mesenchyme and ectoderm of the Chinese softshell turtle Pelodiscus. They also found CRABP-1 expressed in the CR ectoderm. However, they did not detect the expression of either of the previously reported genes, msx1, or FGF-10 in the CR mesenchyme of this species. Species differences might be important in these patterns because the costal bones of Pelodiscus might form by different methods from that of the hardshell turtles (Zangerl, 1969), and the pattern of FGF-10 distribution in the limbs of Pelodiscus differed from the expression pattern seen in the limbs of Trachemys.

The FGF family of paracrine factors is often involved in chemotaxis, and in the chick limb, FGF-10 appears to be critical in directing the endodermal chemotaxis in the lung (Park et al., 1998; Weaver et al., 2000). Cebra-Thomas and colleagues (2005) demonstrated that FGF-induced chemotaxis plays an important role in causing the rib precursors to enter the CR. They cultured eviscerated trunk explants of stage 15 Trachemys embryos ventral-side down on nucleopore membranes. At this stage, the CR is visible and the sclerotome has been specified. After three days in culture, the ribs have migrated into the CR, and the ridges are visibly raised. However, if SU5402 (an inhibitor of FGF signaling) is added to the culture media when the explants are established, the CR degenerates and the ribs travel ventrally, like the ribs of non-Chelonians. Cebra-Thomas and colleagues also show that chick rib precursor cells are responsive to FGF-10, and beads containing FGF-10 will redirect chick rib growth in culture. Thus, the CR appears to be critical for directing the migration of rib precursor cells into it. FGF signaling in the CR appears to be crucial in the maintenance of the CR and is either directly or indirectly responsible for guiding the rib precursor cells into the CR.

Another finding of Cebra-Thomas and colleagues (2005) was that the distal tip of each rib expressed FGF-8. High levels of FGF-8 expression have not been reported in the distal ribs of other organisms. Cebra-Thomas and colleagues speculate that FGF-8 (in the ribs) and FGF-10 (in the CR mesenchyme) may establish a positive feedback loop such that the growth of the rib becomes coordinated with the growth of the carapace. Such a positive feedback loop has been shown to be responsible for the coordinated outgrowth of the chick and mouse limb buds (Ohuchi et al., 1997; Kawakami et al., 2001).

1.2.2.2 Costal Bones: The Ossification of the Carapace

The rib precursor cells that enter into the CR are prechondrocytes (Figure 1.1A,B), and the ribs undergo normal endochondral ossification, replacing the cartilage with bone cells (Figure 1.1C,D). Cebra-Thomas and colleagues (2005) have proposed that bone morphogenetic proteins (BMP), which are secreted by hypertrophic chondrocytes during endochondral ossification, are capable of inducing the dermis to ossify as well. Thus, they claim that costal bone formation is caused by the BMP-dependent ossification of the dermis by the ribs. The rib precursor cells enter the dermis of the shell a short distance from their origin in the vertebrae and grow laterally within the carapacial dermis (Ruckes, 1929; Burke 1989b, 1989c; Gilbert et al., 2001). When endochondral ossification takes place, the rib is converted to bone, beginning at the proximal end (Figure 1.1E). However, the distal portion of the rib remains cartilaginous beyond the boundary between pleural and marginal scutes, and they do not make contact with the peripheral bones until later in life. There is an ante- rior-posterior polarity, in that the anterior ribs begin ossification earlier.

Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]