Abstract
Hemichordates are closely related to echinoderms, which are remarkable for their powers of regeneration. Among hemichordates, some enteropneust worms show dramatic regeneration, though this process has not been as well studied as in echinoderms. Unlike echinoderms, which are pentameral in adult form, hemichordates exhibit bilateral symmetry throughout the life cycle. Adult body regeneration in hemichordates may therefore show similar molecular patterning to chordate regeneration. In this chapter, we review the original literature about regeneration in hemichordates. We present our results from Glossobalanus berkeleyi and Ptychodera flava, the latter of which reliably regenerates anterior structures in the laboratory. When P. flava is bisected, the wound at the anterior end of the posterior half heals, followed by outgrowth of a blastema that becomes the new proboscis. After the proboscis develops, the mouth opens, the collar folds up, and gill slits are formed by tissue remodeling in the posterior worm fragment. Renewed interest in hemichordate regeneration, combined with the fact that it can be elicited in the lab, sets the stage for using molecular markers for stem cells and differentiated tissue in order to characterize the cellular and molecular events occurring during hemichordate regeneration. Hemichordate data presented here suggests that the ability to regenerate using stem cells may be common in ambulacrarian deuterostomes, the sister group to chordates. Understanding the molecular basis of regeneration in hemichordates may lead the way to methods for stimulating regeneration in vertebrates, including in humans for therapeutic purposes.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
10.1 Introduction
Regeneration is a phenomenon widespread among metazoans. Most animal groups, with nematodes and cephalochordates as possible exceptions, include some species that regenerate certain tissues (Sánchez Alvarado 2000). Morgan classified regeneration into two different types: regeneration that requires cell proliferation (epimorphosis), and regeneration that does not require cell proliferation (morphallaxis) (Morgan 1898; Morgan 1901; Sánchez Alvarado 2000). Epimorphosis is frequently seen in the form of a blastema, a mass of proliferating undifferentiated cells that precedes regeneration. Morphallaxis, on the other hand, involves remodeling of existing tissues without extensive cell proliferation. Epimorphic blastema regeneration is the characteristic mode of regeneration found in vertebrates. Limbs and tails of anuran tadpoles (Dent 1962; Shimizu-Nishikawa et al. 2003; Mochii et al. 2007), urodele amphibians (Iten and Bryant 1976; Brockes 1997; Echeverri and Tanaka 2005) and fins of zebrafish (Stoick-Cooper et al. 2007; Yokoyama et al. 2007) form blastemas when replacing missing structures. In tunicates, it appears that regeneration occurs most frequently through epimorphosis. In colonial tunicates, whole body regeneration is accomplished via epimorphosis without a blastema, a process similar to asexual vascular budding (Goldin 1948; Rinkevich et al. 2007; Ballarin and Manni 2009; Sköld et al. 2009). Neural regeneration in the solitary adult tunicate, Ciona, probably involves non-blastemal epimorphosis and morphallaxis as well (Schultze 1900; Bollner et al. 1993; Bollner et al. 1995; Bollner et al.1997).
Because regeneration in a given animal may employ both epimorphosis and morphallaxis, the terms distalization and intercalation have been proposed by Agata et al. (2007) to describe regeneration processes. Frequently, the first step during regeneration is wound healing. At this point, whether or not a blastema is formed, there must be a new patterning axis established in order for the new tissues to be replaced correctly. This process is called distalization, and occurs whether regeneration is accomplished via epimorphosis or morphallaxis. Next, tissues that were lost must be replaced, and this process is called intercalation. Intercalation also can involve epimorphosis or morphallaxis.
A third distinction that can be made between regeneration modes is whether or not regeneration results in simply repairing a damaged individual or results in two complete individuals – resulting in asexual reproduction. Regeneration is considered bi-directional when bisection of an animal will result in two fully functional animals, and unidirectional if only one half regenerates. Within deuterostomes, bi-directional regeneration is characteristic of some echinoderms (Emson and Wilkie 1980; Mladenov and Burke 1984; Vickery et al. 2001b; Vickery et al. 2002; Eaves and Palmer 2003; Knott et al. 2003; McGovern 2003; Rubilar et al. 2005; Candia Carnevali 2006) and possibly of hemichordates (Gilchrist 1923; Packard 1968; Petersen and Ditadi 1971) but not of solitary ascidians or vertebrates (chordates).
Here, we begin by reviewing regeneration mechanisms and asexual reproduction in echinoderms, since they are closely related to hemichordates, and the processes of regeneration in them are much better understood. Next, we will review original literature concerning asexual reproduction and regeneration in hemichordates, present new data from studies on regeneration in enteropneust worms that is ongoing in our laboratory, and suggest where we expect future studies to be most fruitful.
10.2 Regeneration and Asexual Reproduction in Echinoderms
Within ambulacraria (echinoderms and hemichordates) (Swalla and Smith 2007), echinoderms have been documented to have extensive regeneration (Candia Carnevali 2006). There are five extant classes of echinoderms: crinoids (sea lilies), asteroids (sea stars), ophiuroids (brittle stars), holothuroids (sea cucumbers) and echinoids (sea urchins and sand dollars). Some species in each echinoderm class have been reported to regenerate (Candia Carnevali et al. 2009; D’Ancona Lunetta 2009). Crinoids are the most basal class of echinoderms and their ability to regenerate new arms has been well documented (Candia Carnevali et al. 1997; Candia Carnevali et al. 1998; Thorndyke et al. 2001a; Thorndyke et al. 2001b; Patruno et al. 2003), even in the fossil record (Oji 2001), suggesting that regeneration is an ancestral trait of echinoderms.
Both bi- and unidirectional regeneration modes are found in echinoderms. Examples of unidirectional regeneration are found in sea star arms and radial central nerve cords (Cuenot 1948; Thorndyke et al. 2001a) and sea cucumber gut and muscle regeneration after spontaneous evisceration (Dolmatov and Ginanova 2001; Garcia-Arraras and Greenberg 2001). Of all classes of echinoderms, adult sea urchins have the most limited regenerative capacity, yet they are still able to regenerate several of their body parts, including spines and pedicellariae (Heatfield and Travis 1975a,b; Drager et al. 1989; Dubois and Ameye 2001).
Some adult asteroids, ophiuroids, and holothuroids are able to regenerate bi-directionally when arms are cut or autonomized (Emson and Wilkie 1980; Mladenov and Burke 1984; Mazzone and Byrne 2001; Mazzone et al. 2003). This regeneration mechanism furthermore allows some species to reproduce asexually. Spontaneous autonomous fission in adults is the primary means of reproduction in some species (McGovern 2003; Rubilar et al. 2005), which probably leads to clonal populations. Echinoderm larvae of nearly every class (echinoids, asteroid, ophiuroids, and holothuroids) commonly clone themselves both in culture and nature through asexual budding (Bosch 1988; Bosch et al. 1989; Jaeckle 1994; Balser 1998; Vickery and McClintock 2000; Eaves and Palmer 2003; Knott et al. 2003; Sköld et al. 2009). Larval cloning in echinoids and ophiuroids appears to occur by a recapitulation of usual developmental processes based on visual observation of the process (Eaves and Palmer 2003; Knott et al. 2003). It will be especially informative to examine how closely echinoderm adult fission and larval cloning mimic normal development on a cellular and molecular basis.
In addition to the natural process of larval cloning in planktotrophic larvae, in some cases, surgically bisected echinoderm larvae can regenerate bi-directionally (Vickery et al. 2001b, 2002). Bi-directional regeneration in bisected larva is seen in sea urchins (echinoids) and sea stars (asteroids). Sand dollars (echinoids) were observed to regenerate completely the posterior half, but the anterior half was reported to only partially regenerate over two weeks (Vickery et al. 1999). Mesenchymal cells were seen migrating into the cut site, and were similar in appearance to mesenchymal cells forming the blastema in adult echinoderm arm regeneration (Bonasoro et al. 1998; Thorndyke et al. 1999; Candia Carnevali and Bonasoro 2001). Larval halves lacking coeloms and hence, lacking coelomocytes, were still able to regenerate. This indicates that coelomocytes are not required for this process, at least in echinoderm larvae (Vickery et al. 2002). Subtractive hybridization was done to isolate genes involved in the process of larval regeneration after bisection and revealed nine differentially expressed genes (Vickery et al. 2001a). At the time of publication in 2001, eight of these genes had no known homology with any gene in GenBank, indicating the potential power of this technique in marine invertebrates for discovering new genes important in regeneration. Whether regeneration occurs in injured holothuroid, crinoid, and ophiuroid larvae remains to be seen. Holothuroid (Hörstadius 1925, 1928, 1973; Dolmatov 1991) and non-feeding crinoid larvae (Runnström 1925) that have been bisected have had limited success in achieving full regeneration, but they have not been studied as intensively as other echinoderm classes for their regenerative capacity. Ophiuroid larvae, though known to clone from the cast off larval arms (Balser 1998), have not yet been shown to regenerate following surgical bisection. It is also unknown whether or not crinoid larvae or hemichordate tornaria larvae (which are morphologically similar to echinoderm larvae) are able to regenerate or clone.
10.3 Developmental Genes Implicated in Echinoderm Regeneration
Molecular understanding of regeneration in echinoderms has only recently been explored. So far, only a few genes have been implicated in being differentially regulated during regeneration in echinoderms, including Hox1, and BMP2/4 and univin, from the TGF-ß superfamily of signaling molecules (Table 10.1). Hox1 is expressed at low levels in normal sea star radial nerves, and is upregulated during regeneration of the nerve (Thorndyke et al. 2001a,b). Hox gene expression has also been seen in other regeneration systems. For instance, Hox genes are expressed during planarian (Bayascas et al. 1997; Bayascas et al. 1998; Saló et al. 2001) and urodele amphibian limb regeneration (Simon and Tabin 1993; Stocum 1996; Brockes 1997; Torok et al. 1998; Carlson et al. 2001; Nicolas et al. 2003). It is thought that Hox expression is important for repatterning the body or limb axis during regeneration, as during embryonic development. Experiments with urodele amphibians show that there are Hox genes expressed during regeneration that are regeneration specific (Brown and Brockes 1991; Stocum 1996; Torok et al. 1998; Carlson et al. 2001; Christen et al. 2003).
Bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) are part of the TGF-β (transforming growth factor- β) superfamily of signaling molecules (Hogan 1996; Newfeld et al. 1999). BMPs play important roles in animal embryonic development as well as in wound healing (O’Kane and Ferguson 1997) and regeneration in the tail and limb of frog tadpoles (Beck et al. 2006). BMP2 and BMP4 are normally expressed during frog tail and limb development, and if either are antagonized after tail and limb amputation, these structures fail to regenerate (Beck et al. 2006). Echinoderms have two TGF- β superfamily members that have been implicated in echinoderm arm regeneration: BMP2/4 (Patruno et al. 2003) and a TGF- β gene related to Xenopus Vg1 (Range et al. 2007), univin (Bannister et al. 2005), although the functional role of these genes in normal post embryonic echinoderm development is unknown. In a crinoid, BMP2/4 is expressed early in arm regeneration in the blastema, later in the coelomic canal epithelium, and in advanced stages, expression is found only proximally where new tissue is being differentiated (Thorndyke et al. 2001a,b,c; Patruno et al. 2003). A TGF- β similar to sea urchin univin is expressed during several stages of arm regeneration in brittle stars (ophiuroids), and expression is seen in coelomocytes in both normal and regenerating adults (Bannister et al. 2005).
Both BMP2/4 and univin are known to be important in early embryonic development in echinoids. Univin promotes embryonic skeletal growth in sea urchin embryos and larvae (Zito et al. 2003). In early development univin is upstream of nodal signaling and is important in the dorsoventral (oral-aboral) axis formation of the sea urchin embryo (Range et al. 2007). BMP2/4 is also implicated in patterning the dorsoventral axis of sea urchins (Duboc et al. 2004). While it is not yet known if BMP2/4 or a gene similar to univin is implicated in hemichordate regeneration, some evidence exists for similar embryonic function for BMP2/4 in hemichordates and echinoderms. Expression of BMP2/4 in morphologically similar echinoderm holothuroid and hemichordate ptychoderid larvae was seen specifically in the hydropore region (Harada et al. 2002), suggesting that they are homologous structures. BMP2/4 expression has not been reported in indirect developing hemichordate Ptychodera flava embryos (Harada et al. 2002) but is important for body patterning in the direct developing hemichordate, Saccoglossus kowalevskii. BMP2/4 expression in S. kowalevskii begins during gastrulation, where it is expressed on one side of the embryo. Expression continues throughout development in the same place, but it narrows to a stripe on the ectoderm at the dorsal midline by the juvenile stage (Lowe et al. 2006). Knock down of BMP2/4 expression in S. kowalevskii results in a ventralized embryo since the mouth forms circumferentially and gill slits that normally form on the dorsal side are lacking, whereas overexpression of BMP2/4 results in a dorsalized embryo lacking a mouth (Lowe et al. 2006). Therefore, BMP2/4 plays an important role in dorsal-ventral axis formation in sea urchin and direct developing hemichordate embryos.
Hemichordates are less well characterized than echinoderms in their regenerative abilities, but some species of enteropneust worms have remarkable regeneration (Hadfield 1975). However, this subject has received little research attention in the intervening decades. Our lab is currently studying regeneration in several different enteropneust hemichordate species.
10.4 Sexual and Asexual Reproduction in Hemichordates
Regeneration ability often correlates with reproductive mode. Animals that are able to reproduce asexually are often also able to overcome injury via regeneration. Therefore, asexual reproduction and regeneration ability have been considered related phenomena (Sánchez Alvarado 2000; Bely and Wray 2001; van Bekkum 2004; Saló 2006). For instance, in groups such as tunicates where some forms reproduce only sexually, and others both asexually and sexually, those that are able to asexually reproduce are highly regenerative compared to obligate sexual reproducers (Kawamura et al. 2008; Tiozzo et al. 2008).
Hemichordates follow one of two distinct life histories, the solitary enteropneust worms (Fig. 10.1 A,B), and the colonial pterobranchs (Fig. 10.1C,D). Solitary enteropneusts comprise the indirect developing families Ptychoderidae (Fig. 10.1A), Spengelidae (not shown), and a direct developing family Harrimaniidae (Fig. 10.1B) (Cameron et al. 2000). Despite the fact that all enteropneust hemichordates are obligate sexual reproducers, and besides developmental mode differences (indirect vs. direct), they are distinguished by differences in morphology. In the adult enteropneusts, the anterior proboscis of ptychoderids is much shorter and wider than the long thin proboscis of harrimaniids (Fig. 10.1A,B) (Kowalevsky 1866; Spengel 1893; Hyman 1959). Also in ptychoderids, the gill bar skeleton has adjacent gill bars connected by small synapticulae, their gonads are contained within prominent ridges or wings in the branchial region of the trunk, and in the posterior trunk hepatic saccules or outpockets of the gut are found (Fig. 10.1A). However, no synapticulae, genital ridges, or hepatic saccules are present in harrimaniids (Hyman 1959; Aronowicz and Lowe 2006).
In contrast, the colonial pterobranchs are extremely morphologically divergent from solitary enteropneusts and include the direct developing families Cephalodiscidae (Fig. 10.1C) and Rhabdopleuridae (Fig. 10.1D) (Cameron et al. 2000). Pterobranch hemichordates reproduce both asexually and sexually (Fig. 10.2A), but regeneration ability has not yet been documented. Cephalodiscid pterobranch zooids are usually seen with 1–14 buds growing from the most posterior end of the stalk, the number of buds depending on the species (Figs. 10.1C and 10.2A). Adult asexually reproduced cephalodiscid zooids secrete their own coenecium (external collagenous tube) and thereby remain attached to their parent zooid although the living tissues of individual parent and offspring may or may not remain physically linked (Masterman 1900; Schepotieff 1908; Lester 1985; Schiaparelli et al. 2004) (Fig. 10.2A). By contrast, budding in rhabdopleurid pterobranchs occurs along the stolons that connect individuals to one another, so that the individuals are distinct (Figs. 10.1D and 10.2A). Both terminal and lateral buds develop along a given stretch of stolon (Schepotieff 1907b; Stebbing 1970; Dilly 1975) (Fig. 10.2A). This type of clonal reproduction and attachment of adult zooids is comparable to social ascidians which form asexual buds from stolons that connect individual zooids (Zeng et al. 2006; Tiozzo et al. 2008). The differences in budding between groups of pterobranchs results in clumped grouping of zooids in cephalodiscids (Fig. 10.1C) compared with more dispersed individuals in colonies of rhabdopleurids (Fig. 10.1D).
Solitary hemichordates, on the other hand, are obligate sexual reproducers (Fig. 10.2B). It is possible, however, that fragile enteropneusts that are broken by wave action or predation are, in some species, able to recover via regeneration of resulting pieces, which may lead to two or more new individuals from a single severed worm. Although both harrimaniids and ptychoderid solitary enteropneusts are obligate sexual reproducers, they are not equally able to regenerate.
10.5 Regeneration in Solitary Enteropneust Worms
We focus here on regeneration in solitary enteropneust hemichordates, since very little is documented for colonial hemichordate regeneration. First, we describe the normal developmental mode in hemichordates, and then their regeneration potential. The direct developing harrimaniids progress from embryogenesis directly into a juvenile worm (Fig. 10.2B) (Bateson 1884, 1885; Hyman 1959; Cameron et al. 2000), although they do spend a short period of time as a non-feeding lecithotropic larva. Ptychoderids are indirect developers, and following embryogenesis, pass through a planktonic feeding stage (tornaria) prior to settling and developing adult structures (Fig. 10.2B) (Metschnikoff 1869; Hadfield 1975; Urata and Yamaguchi 2004).
Regeneration has been reported just once in a direct developing harrimaniid (Tweedell 1961). In Saccoglossus kowalevskii, regeneration is fairly limited in lab conditions as they are only able to regenerate the most anterior structures after amputation, that is, within the proboscis and collar (Fig. 10.1B). In contrast, several ptychoderid species (Ptychodera flava, Glossobalanus minutus, Balanoglossus australiensis, and Glossobalanus crozieri) have been reported to have remarkable regeneration (Willey 1899; Dawydoff 1909, 1948; Rao 1955; Packard 1968; Petersen and Ditadi 1971). Most of the published observations have been from posterior trunk pieces containing only gonad, gut, and hepatic sacculations that are able to regenerate all new anterior structures, including the proboscis and collar, which contain the heart, kidney, collar nerve cord, stomochord, and proboscis skeleton, and the branchial region containing the pharyngeal slits and skeleton (Willey 1899; Dawydoff 1909, 1948; Rao 1955; Packard 1968; Petersen and Ditadi 1971).
All of the detailed reports of ptychoderid regeneration have several features in common. Anterior regeneration from an amputated trunk appears to incorporate both epimorphosis and morphallaxis (Dawydoff 1909; Rao 1955). We have repeated many of the observations of Dawydoff (1909) and Rao (1955) in studies of regeneration in Ptychodera flava over eight days in running seawater tables at Kewalo Marine Laboratory in Honolulu, HI. The first step, wound closure, is accomplished by the endoderm growing together with ectoderm, and we see this occurring in all amputated worms within two days (Figs. 10.3A,B,D,E and 10.4 D) (Rao 1955). Based on histological data, Rao (1955) observed mesenchyme cells or coelomic cells from the coelomic fluid of trunk region migrate into the wound site. Epimorphosis is characteristic of the beginning of the regenerative process: within two days the wound has closed, then at four days, cells have moved into the space between the endoderm and ectoderm (Figs. 10.3F and 10.4E). A small blastemal structure was seen at day four in six of seven animals bisected. This blastema precedes the formation of the proboscis and appears to be the distalization step in hemichordate regeneration. Next, the proboscis begins to grow out from the proliferated tissue, which at day six, was present in six out of eight amputated animals along with a mouth opening (Fig. 10.3G–I). Rao (1955) concluded that the mouth only breaks through once the ectoderm differentiation is complete. We have observed endoderm on lateral sides of the proboscis evaginated by day six (Fig. 10.4G), although no collar rudiments were visible externally. Then, by day eight, collar buds were visible externally in five out of seven amputated worms. During this time, around day six to eight, we have also observed the stomochord forming via endoderm evagination as in normal development (Figs. 10.4I and 10.5B) (Rao 1955). These collar halves later fuse first on the ventral side (Fig. 10.3H), and secondarily on the dorsal side (Fig. 10.3I,J). The dorsal fusion of the two collar halves creates a new dorsal collar nerve tube. Around this time, mesenchyme cells with ectoderm and endoderm form a rudiment that eventually gives rise to the proboscis and heart/kidney complex (Figs. 10.3G–I and 10.4A,I).We have noticed that the proboscis and collar tissue are much lighter in color in regenerated Ptychodera than in non-regenerated adults (Fig. 10.3G–J), indicating that this is newly proliferated tissue that is not yet pigmented. Further evidence for the role of cell proliferation in this process is the presence of PCNA positive nuclei in the proboscis ectoderm, mesenchyme (Fig. 10.5A,C,E), and evaginating endoderm (Fig. 10.5A,B,D) in a day six regenerating animal. It remains to be determined whether or not the mesenchyme are an undifferentiated population of stem cells or whether they dedifferentiate into stem cells once wounding has occurred. Evidence for tissue remodeling to make way for new gill slits to form in the regenerating trunk comes from the paucity of cells in the endoderm that are posterior to evaginating collar endoderm in a day six regenerate (Fig. 10.4F). We propose that these missing cells may have undergone apoptosis and stem cells will later proliferate and remodel the endoderm to form gill endoderm.
Dawydoff (1909, 1948), who examined regeneration in Glossobalanus minutus, noted that while any region of an amputated trunk would regenerate anterior structures, those amputated more anteriorly regenerate more readily. Also, we have seen that the anterior two body portions of P. flava, the proboscis and collar, regenerate more rapidly (within two weeks), than structures of the third body portion, the trunk. In one instance, we observed a worm that had been regenerating for nearly two months with nine to ten gill slits in the trunk (Fig. 10.3 J). While ptychoderids in general may have greater powers of regeneration than harrimaniids, it is possible that not all ptychoderid species regenerate. We have, on several occasions, cut individuals of a Pacific Northwest ptychoderid hemichordate, Glossobalanus berkeleyi, and have not yet seen complete regeneration (Table 10.2; Fig. 10.3A–C). In Ptychodera flava, regeneration proceeded very reliably in the lab (Table 10.3), and in each case, regeneration began by forming the most anterior structures first, with more posterior structures following. The proboscis formed first, followed by the collar, then gill slits began to develop in an anterior to posterior manner, similar to how they form in normal development (Fig. 10.3 J) (Aronowicz and Lowe 2006; Rychel et al. 2006; Rychel and Swalla 2007). In conclusion, anterior regeneration in P. flava is a complex process likely involving both cell death of old tissues followed by cell proliferation and tissue remodeling. The source of the stem cells for the new tissues generated in the proboscis and collar is still unknown, but our lab is actively pursuing their identity. We are beginning with a cellular and molecular characterization of hemichordate regeneration and expect this to be an excellent model system once the Ptychodera flava genome is sequenced.
10.6 Future Experiments and Prospectus
Some hemichordate species show extensive regeneration of the anterior structures of the worm and represent a new model system to study stem cells and regeneration. In Ptychodera flava, the entire proboscis, mouth, and collar regenerate from the posterior half within two weeks after bisection of the worm, and gill slits are slowly added over a longer time scale. In our observations, the anterior structures are regenerated more quickly than more posterior ones, and this would be selectively advantageous to allow eating quickly. We have on several occasions bisected the harrimaniid, Saccoglossus bromophenolosus, and have not observed any regeneration. This combined with evidence from Saccoglossus kowalevskii (Tweedell 1961) suggest that the direct developing harrimaniids show much less regeneration than the ptychoderid worms that have planktonic tornaria larvae. Since these families are also separated phylogenetically (Cameron et al. 2000), it is difficult to know whether regeneration differences are due to phylogenetic history, or if reduced regeneration potential is a consequence of direct development. We know that echinoderms vary in regenerative ability, since among the classes of echinoderms, echinoids have the most limited regenerative ability as adults. It would be interesting to see if echinoderms varied in their regenerative abilities in a phylogenetic way within classes and/or if the differences seen are also linked to direct development. It is unknown whether hemichordate tornaria larvae are capable of cloning, a common ability in brittle star, sea star, sea urchin, and sea cucumber larvae. If they can, then it suggests this is an ancestral feature of dipleurula ambulacrarian larvae; while if not, then this would be a phenomenon that would be restricted to echinoderm larvae.
In light of the current excitement about stem cells and regeneration for medical purposes, the study of the cellular behaviors and molecular mechanisms of hemichordate stem cells and regeneration is relevant since they have a body plan with many features in common with vertebrates (Aronowicz and Lowe 2006; Rychel and Swalla 2007; Swalla 2007). The hemichordate body plan develops in an anterior to posterior fashion, similar to vertebrates, and expression of the Hox genes begins right at the first gill slit (Lowe et al. 2003; Aronowicz and Lowe 2006; Swalla 2006) just as Hox gene expression begins dorsal to the first gill slit or arch in the midbrain of vertebrates. These results show that an A-P axis based on Hox expression is conserved between hemichordates and vertebrates. The coelomic cells that are necessary for regeneration in echinoderms and hemichordates are likely made up of mesenchymal or stem cells, that are capable of differentiating into a variety of cell types. The in-depth study of these cells will be fascinating. We hope to understand how they are mobilized, multiply and then subsequently differentiate after injury in hemichordates.
References
Agata K, Saito Y, Nakajima E (2007) Unifying principles of regeneration I: Epimorphosis versus morphallaxis. Dev Growth Diff 49:73–78
Andersson KA (1907) Die Pterobranchier der schwedischen Südpolarexpedition 1901–1903. Wiss Ergebn Schwed Südpolar-Exp 5:1–122
Aronowicz J, Lowe CJ (2006) Hox gene expression in the hemichordate Saccoglossus kowalevskii and the evolution of deuterostome nervous systems. Integr Comp Biol 46:890–901
Ballarin L, Manni L (2009) Stem cells in sexual and asexual reproduction of Botryllus schlosseri (Ascidiacea, Tunicata): An overview. In: Matranga V, Rinkevich B (eds) Marine Stem Cells. Springer, New York, in press
Balser EJ (1998) Cloning by ophiuroid echinoderm larvae. Biol Bull 194:187–193
Bannister R, McGonnell IM, Graham A, Thorndyke MC, Beesley PW (2005) Afuni, a novel transforming growth factor-β gene is involved in arm regeneration by the brittle star Amphiura filiformis. Dev Genes Evol 215:393–401
Bateson W (1884) The early stages in the development of Balanoglossus. Q J Microsc Sci 24:208–236
Bateson W (1885) The later stages in the development of Balanoglossus kowalevskii. Q J Microsc Sci 25:81–122
Bayascas J, Castillo E, Muñoz-Mármol AM, Baguñà J, Saló E (1998) Synchronous and early activation of planarian Hox genes and the re-specification of body axes during regeneration in Dugesia (G.) tigrina (Turbellaria; Tricladida). Hydrobiologia 383:125–130
Bayascas JR, Castillo E, Munoz-Marmol AM, Salo E (1997) Planarian Hox genes: Novel patterns of expression during regeneration. Development 124:141–148
Beck CW, Christen B, Barker D, Slack JMW (2006) Temporal requirement for bone morphogenetic proteins in regeneration of the tail and limb of Xenopus tadpoles. Mech Dev 123:674–688
Bely AE, Wray GA (2001) Evolution of regeneration and fission in annelids: Insights from engrailed- and orthodenticle-class gene expression. Development 128:2781–2791
Bollner T, Beesley PW, Thorndyke MC (1993) Substance P- and cholecytokinin-like immunoreactivity during post-metamorphic development of the central nervous system in the ascidian Ciona intestinalis. Cell Tissue Res 272:545–552
Bollner T, Beesley PW, Thorndyke MC (1997) Investigation of the contribution from peripheral GnRH-like immunoreactive ‘neuroblasts’ to the regenerating central nervous system in the protochordate Ciona intestinalis. Proc Biol Sci 264:1117–1123
Bollner T, Howalt S, Thorndyke MC, Beesley PW (1995) Regeneration and post-metamorphic development of the central nervous system in the protochordate Ciona intestinalis: A study with monoclonal antibodies. Cell Tissue Res 279:421–432
Bonasoro F, Candia Carnevali MD, Moss C, Thorndyke M (1998) Epimorphic versus morphalactic mechanisms in arm regeneration of crinoids and asteroids: Pattern of cell proliferation and lineage. In: Mooi R, Telford M (eds) Echinoderms. Balkema, Rotterdam
Bosch I (1988) Reproduction by budding in natural populations of bipinaria larvae from the sea star genus Luidia. In: Burke RD, Mladinov PV, Lambert P, Parsley RL (eds) Echinoderm Biology. Balkema, Rotterdam, p 728
Bosch I, Rivkin RB, Alexander SP (1989) Asexual reproduction by oceanic planktotrophic echinoderm larvae. Nature 337:169–170
Brockes JP (1997) Amphibian limb regeneration: Rebuilding a complex structure. Science 276:81–87
Brown R, Brockes JP (1991) Identification and expression of a regeneration-specific homeobox gene in the newt limb blastema. Development 111:489–496
Cameron CB, Garey JR, Swalla BJ (2000) Evolution of the chordate body plan: New insights from phylogenetic analyses of deuterostome phyla. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 97:4469–4474
Candia Carnevali MD (2006) Regeneration in echinoderms: Repair, regrowth, cloning. Invert Surv J 3:64–76
Candia Carnevali MD, Bonasoro F (2001) Microscopic overview of crinoid regeneration. Microsc Res Techn 55:403–426
Candia Carnevali MD, Bonasoro F, Biale A (1997) Pattern of bromodeoxyuridine incorporation in the advanced stages of arm regeneration in the feather star Antedon mediterranea. Cell Tissue Res 289:363–374
Candia Carnevali MD, Bonasoro F, Patruno M, Thorndyke MC (1998) Cellular and molecular mechanisms of arm regeneration in crinoid echinoderms: The potential of arm explants. Dev Genes Evol 208:421–430
Candia Carnevali MD, Thorndyke MR, Matranga V (2009) Regenerating in echinoderms: A promise to understand stem cells potential. In: Matranga V, Rinkevich R (eds) Marine Stem Cells. Springer, New York, in press
Carlson MR, Komine Y, Bryant SV, Gardiner DM (2001) Expression of Hoxb13 and Hoxc10 in developing and regenerating Axolotl limbs and tails. Dev Biol 229:396–406
Christen B, Beck CW, Lombardo A, Slack JM (2003) Regeneration-specific expression pattern of three posterior Hox genes. Dev Dyn 226:349–355
Cuenot L (1948) Anatomie, ethologie et systematique des echinodermes. In: Grassé PP (ed) Traité de zoologie. Masson et Cie, Paris
D’Ancona Lunetta G (2009) Stem cells in Holothuria polii and Sipunculus nudus. In: Matranga V, Rinkevich B (eds) Marine Stem Cells. Springer, New York, in press
Dawydoff C (1909) Beobachtungen über den regenerationsprozess bei den enteropneusten. Z Wiss Zool 93:237–305
Dawydoff C (1948) Embranchement des stomocordés. In: Grassé PP (ed) Traité de Zoologie. Echinodermes, Stomocordés, Protochordés, vol 11. Masson et Cie, Paris, 367–449
Dent JN (1962) Limb regeneration in larvae and metamorphosing individuals of the South African clawed toad. J Morphol 110:61–77
Dilly PN (1975) The dormant buds of Rhabdopleura compacta (Hemichordata). Cell Tissue Res 159:387–397
Dolmatov IY (1991) Regeneration of tentacles in early pentactulae of the holothurian Eupentacta fraudatrix. Biologiya Morya Vladivostok 5:99–101
Dolmatov IY, Ginanova TT (2001) Muscle regeneration in holothurians. Microsc Res Tech 55:452–463
Drager BJ, Harkey MA, Iwata M, Whiteley AH (1989) The expression of embryonic primary mesenchyme genes of the sea urchin, Strongylocentrotus purpuratus, in the adult skeletogenic tissues of this and other species of echinoderms. Dev Biol 133:14–23
Duboc V, Röttinger E, Besnardeau L, Lepage T (2004) Nodal and BMP2/4 signaling organizes the oral-aboral axis of the sea urchin embryo. Dev Cell 6:397–410
Dubois P, Ameye L (2001) Regeneration of spines and pedicellariae in echinoderms: A review. Microsc Res Tech 55:427–437
Eaves AA, Palmer AR (2003) Reproduction: Widespread cloning in echinoderm larvae. Nature 425:146–146
Echeverri K, Tanaka EM (2005) Proximodistal patterning during limb regeneration. Dev Biol 279:391–401
Emson RH, Wilkie IC (1980) Fission and autotomy in echinoderms. Oceanogr Mar Biol Ann Rev 18:155–250
Garcia-Arraras JE, Greenberg MJ (2001) Visceral regeneration in holothurians. Microsc Res Tech 55:438–451
Gilchrist JDF (1923) A form of dimorphism and asexual reproduction in Ptychodera capensis (Hemichordata). J Linn Soc Lond Zool 35:393–398
Goldin A (1948) Regeneration in Perophora viridis. Biol Bull 94:184–193
Hadfield MG (1975) Hemichordata. In: Giese AC, Pearce JS (eds) Reproduction of Marine Invertebrates (vol 2 Entoprocts and Lesser Coelomates). Academic Press, London, pp 185–240
Harada Y, Shoguchi E, Taguchi S, Okai N, Humphreys T, Tagawa K, Satoh N (2002) Conserved expression pattern of BMP-2/4 in hemichordate acorn worm and echinoderm sea cucumber embryos. Zool Sci 19:1113–1121
Heatfield BM, Travis DF (1975a) Ultrastructural studies of regenerating spines of the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus purpuratus. I. Cell types without spherules. J Morphol 145:13–49
Heatfield BM, Travis DF (1975b) Ultrastructural studies of regenerating spines of the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus purpuratus. II. Cell types with spherules. J Morphol 145:51–71
Hogan BL (1996) Bone morphogenetic proteins: Multifunctional regulators of vertebrate development. Genes Dev 10:1580–1594
Hörstadius S (1925) Entwicklungsmechanische studien an Holothuria poli Delle Chiaje. Ark Zool B17 8:1–6
Hörstadius S (1928) Über die determination des keimes bei echinodermen. Acta Zool Stockh 9:1–191
Hörstadius S (1973) Experimental embryology of echinoderms. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Hyman LH (1959) The Enterocoelous Coelomates: Phylum Hemichordata. In: Hyman LH (ed) The invertebrates. Hemichordata. Smaller coelomate groups Chaetognatha, Hemichordata, Pogonophora, Phoronida, Ectoprocta, Brachiopoda, Sipuncuhda. The coelomate bilateria, vol 5. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 72–207
Iten LE, Bryant SV (1976) Stages of tail regeneration in the adult newt, Notophtalmus viridescens. J Exp Zool 196:283–292
Jaeckle WB (1994) Multiple modes of asexual reproduction by tropical and subtropical sea star larvae: An unusual adaptation for genet dispersal and survival. Biol Bull 186:62–71
John CC (1931) Cephalodiscus. Discovery Reports 3:223–260
Kawamura K, Sugino Y, Sunanaga T, Fujiwara S (2008) Multipotent epithelial cells in the process of regeneration and asexual reproduction in colonial tunicates. Dev Growth Diff 50:1–11
Knott KE, Balser EJ, Jaeckle WB, Wray GA (2003) Identification of asteroid genera with species capable of larval cloning. Biol Bull 204:246–255
Kowalevsky A (1866) Anatomie des Balanoglossus Delle Chiaje. Mém l’Acad Imp Sci St Petersburg 7:1–18
Lester SM (1985) Cephalodiscus sp. (Hemichordata: Pterobranchia): Observations of functional morphology, behavior and occurrence in shallow water around Bermuda. Mar Biol 85:263–268
Lester SM (1988) Ultrastructure of adult gonads and development and structure of the larva of Rhabdopleura normani (Hemichordata: Pterobranchia). Acta Zool Stockh 69:95–109
Lowe CJ, Terasaki M, Wu M, Freeman RM, Runft L, Kwan K, Haigo S, Aronowicz J, Lander E, Gruber C, Smith M, Kirschner M, Gerhart J (2006) Dorsoventral patterning in hemichordates: Insights into early chordate evolution. PLoS Biol 4:e291
Lowe CJ, Wu M, Salic A, Evans L, Lander E, Stange-Thomann N, Gruber CE, Gerhart J, Kirschner M (2003) Anteroposterior patterning in hemichordates and the origin of the chordate nervous system. Cell 113:853–865
Marion A (1886) Études zoologique sur deux espèces d’entéropneustes. Arch Zool Exp Gén Ser 2 4:305–326
Masterman A (1900) On the further anatomy and the budding processes of Cephalodiscus. Trans Roy Soc Edinb 39:507–527
Mazzone F, Byrne M (2001) The haemal sinus – a possible conduit for migratory cells involved in repair and regeneration of the radial nerve cord in Coscinasterias muricata following autonomy. In: Barker MF (ed) Echinoderms 2000. Balkema, Lisse, pp 167–191
Mazzone F, Byrne M, Thorndyke M (2003) Regeneration in the sea star Coscinasterias muricata following autonomy. In: Feral JP, David B (eds) Echinoderm research 2001. Balkema, Lisse, pp 209–213
McGovern TM (2003) Plastic reproductive strategies in a clonal marine invertebrate. Proc Royal Soc B: Biol Sci 270:2517–2522
Metschnikoff E (1869) Ueber die systematische stellung von Balanoglossus. Zool Anz 4:139–143, 153–157
Mladenov PV, Burke RD (1984) Echinodermata: Asexual propagation. In: Adiyodi KG, Adiyodi RG (eds) Reproductive biology of invertebrates, vol VI part B. Asexual propagation and reproductive strategies. Oxford and Hill, New Delhi, pp 339–383
Mochii M, Taniguchi Y, Shikata I (2007) Tail regeneration in the Xenopus tadpole. Dev Growth Diff 49:155–161
Morgan TH (1898) Experimental studies of the regeneration of Planaria maculata. Arch Entw Mech Org 7:364–397
Morgan TH (1901) Regeneration. The Macmillan Company, New York
Newfeld SJ, Wisotzkey RG, Kumar S (1999) Molecular evolution of a developmental pathway: Phylogenetic analyses of transforming growth factor-β family ligands, receptors and smad signal transducers. Genetics 152:783–795
Nicolas S, Papillon D, Perez Y, Caubit X, Le Parco Y (2003) The spatial restrictions of 5’ HoxC genes expression are maintained in adult newt spinal cord. Biol Cell 95:589–594
O’Kane S, Ferguson MWJ (1997) Transforming growth factor βs and wound healing. Int J Biochem Cell Biol 29:63–78
Oji T (2001) Fossil record of echinoderm regeneration with special regard to crinoids. Microsc Res Techn 55:397–402
Packard A (1968) Asexual reproduction in Balanoglossus (Stomochordata). Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 171:261–272
Patruno M, McGonnell I, Graham A, Beesley P, Candia Carnevali MD, Thorndyke M (2003) Anbmp2/4 is a new member of the transforming growth factor-β superfamily isolated from a crinoid and involved in regeneration. Proc R Soc Lond B 27:1341–1347
Petersen JA, Ditadi ASF (1971) Asexual reproduction in Glossobalanus crozieri (Ptychoderidae, Enteropneusta, Hemichordata). Mar Biol 9:78–85
Range R, Lapraz F, Quirin M, Marro S, Besnardeau L, Lepage T (2007) Cis-regulatory analysis of nodal and maternal control of dorsal-ventral axis formation by Univin, a TGF-β related to Vg1. Development 134:3649–3664
Rao KP (1955) Morphogenesis during regeneration in an enteropneust. J Animal Morphol Physiol 1:1–7
Rinkevich Y, Paz G, Rinkevich B, Reshef R (2007) Systemic bud induction and retinoic acid signaling underlie whole body regeneration in the urochordate Botrylloides leachi. PLoS Biology 5:e71
Rubilar T, Pastor de Ward CT, Díaz de Vivar ME (2005) Sexual and asexual reproduction of Allostichaster capensis (Echinodermata: Asteroidea) in Golfo Nuevo. Mar Biol 146:1083–1090
Runnström J (1925) Regulatorische bildung von cölomanlagen bei seeigelkeimen mit gehemmter urdarmbildung. W Roux Arch Entw Mech Org 105:114–119
Rychel AL, Smith SE, Shimamoto HT, Swalla BJ (2006) Evolution and development of the chordates: Collagen and pharyngeal cartilage. Mol Biol Evol 23:541–549
Rychel AL, Swalla BJ (2007) Development and evolution of chordate cartilage. J Exp Zool B Mol Dev Evol 308B:325–335
Saló E (2006) The power of regeneration and the stem-cell kingdom: Freshwater planarians (Platyhelminthes). BioEssays 28:546–559
Saló E, Tauler J, Jimenez E, Ramón Bayascas J, Gonzalez-Linares J, Garcia-Fernàndez J, Baguñà J (2001) Hox and ParaHox genes in flatworms: Characterization and expression. Am Zool 41:652–663
Sánchez Alvarado A (2000) Regeneration in the metazoans: Why does it happen? Bioessays 22:578–590
Schepotieff A (1907a) Die Anatomie von Rhabdopleura. Zool Jahrb Abt Anat 23:463–534
Schepotieff A (1907b) Knospungsprozess und gehäuse von Rhabdopleura. Zool Jahrb Abt Anat 24:193–238
Schepotieff A (1908) Knospungsprozess von Cephalodiscus. Zool Jahrb Abt Anat 25:405–494
Schepotieff A (1909) Die Pterobranchier des Indischen Ozeans. Zool Jahrb Abt Anat 24:429–448
Schiaparelli S, Cattaneo-Vietti R, Mierzejewski P (2004) A “protective shell” around the larval cocoon of Cephalodiscus densus Andersson, 1907 (Graptolithoidea, Hemichordata). Polar Biol 27:813–817
Schultze LS (1900) Die regeneration des ganglions von Ciona intestinalis L. und über das verhältnis der regeneration und knospung zur keimblätterlehre. Jena Z Natwiss 33:263–344
Shimizu-Nishikawa K, Takahashi J, Nishikawa A (2003) Intercalary and supernumerary regeneration in the limbs of the frog, Xenopus laevis. Dev Dyn 227:563–572
Simon HG, Tabin CJ (1993) Analysis of Hox-4.5 and Hox-3.6 expression during newt limb regeneration: Differential regulation of paralogous Hox genes suggest different roles for members of different Hox clusters. Development 117:1397–1407
Sköld H, Obst M, Sköld M, Åkesson B (2009) Asexual reproduction in marine metazoans. In: Matranga V, Rinkevich B (eds) Marine Stem Cells. Springer, New York, in press
Spengel JW (1893) Die enteropneusten des golfes von Neapel. Fauna und Flora des Golfes von Neapel Monogr 18:1–755
Stebbing ARD (1970) Aspects of the reproduction and life cycle of Rhabdopleura compacta (Hemichordata). Mar Biol 5:205–212
Stocum DL (1996) A conceptual framework for analyzing axial patterning in regenerating urodele limbs. Int J Dev Biol 40:773–783
Stoick-Cooper CL, Weidinger G, Riehle KJ, Hubbert C, Major MB, Fausto N, Moon RT (2007) Distinct Wnt signaling pathways have opposing roles in appendage regeneration. Development 134:479–489
Swalla BJ (2006) Building divergent body plans with similar genetic pathways. Heredity 97:235–243
Swalla BJ (2007) New insights into vertebrate origins. In: Moody S (ed) Principles of Developmental Genetics. Elsevier Science/Academic Press, San Diego, pp 114–128
Swalla BJ, Smith AB (2008) Deciphering deuterostome phylogeny: Molecular, morphological and palaeontological perspectives. Proc R Soc Lond, 363:1557–1568
Thorndyke M, Chen WC, Moss C, Candia Carnevali MD (1999) Regeneration in echinoderms: Cellular and molecular aspects. In: Candia Carnevali MD, Bonasoro F (eds) Echinoderm Research. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 159–164
Thorndyke MC, Chen WC, Beesley PW, Patruno M (2001a) Molecular approach to echinoderm regeneration. Microsc Res Tech 55:474–485
Thorndyke MC, Patruno M, Chen WC, Beesley PW (2001b) Stem cells and regeneration in invertebrate deuterostomes. Symp Soc Exp Biol 53:107–120
Thorndyke MC, Patruno M, Moss C, Beesley PW, Mallefet J (2001c) Cellular and molecular bases of arm regeneration in brittlestars. In: Barker M (ed) Echinoderms 2000. Swets & Zeitlinger, Lisse, pp 323–326
Tiozzo S, Brown FD, De Tomaso AW (2008) Regeneration and stem cells in ascidians. In: Bosch TCG (ed) Stem Cells from Hydra to Man. Springer, New York, pp 95–112
Torok MA, Gardiner DM, Shubin NH, Bryant SV (1998) Expression of HoxD genes in developing and regenerating Axolotl limbs. Dev Biol 200:225–233
Tweedell KS (1961) Regeneration of the enteropneust Saccoglossus kowalevskii. Biol Bull 120:118–127
Urata M, Yamaguchi M (2004) The development of the enteropneust hemichordate Balanoglossus misakiensis Kuwano. Zool Sci 21:533–540
van Bekkum DW (2004) Phylogenetic aspects of tissue regeneration: Role of stem cells: A concise overview. Blood Cells Mol Dis 32:11–16
Vickery MC, Vickery MS, McClintock JB, Amsler CD (2001a) Utilization of a novel deuterostome model for the study of regeneration genetics: Molecular cloning of genes that are differentially expressed during early stages of larval sea star regeneration. Gene 262:73–80
Vickery MCL, Vickery MS, Amsler CD, McClintock JB (2001b) Regeneration in echinoderm larvae. Microsc Res Techn 55:464–473
Vickery MS, McClintock JB (2000) Effects of food concentration and availability on the incidence of cloning in planktotrophic larvae of the sea star Pisaster ochraceus. Biol Bull 199:298–304
Vickery MS, Vickery MC, McClintock JB (2002) Morphogenesis and organogenesis in the regenerating planktotrophic larvae of asteroids and echinoids. Biol Bull 203:121–133
Vickery MS, Vickery MCL, McClintock JB (1999) Regeneration in echinoid larvae. Am Zool 39:51A
Willey A (1899) Enteropneusta from the South Pacific with notes on the West Indian species. Willey’s Zoological Results 3:223–334
Yokoyama H, Ogino H, Stoick-Cooper CL, Grainger RM, Moon RT (2007) Wnt/beta-catenin signaling has an essential role in the initiation of limb regeneration. Dev Biol 306:170–178
Zeng L, Jacobs MW, Swalla BJ (2006) Coloniality has evolved once in stolidobranch ascidians. Integr Comp Biol 46:255–268
Zito F, Costa C, Sciarrino S, Poma V, Russo R, Angerer LM, Matranga V (2003) Expression of univin, a TGF-β growth factor, requires ectoderm-ECM interaction and promotes skeletal growth in the sea urchin embryo. Dev Biol 264:217–227
Acknowledgments
We would like to extend a special “thank you” to Dr. Michael Hadfield of Kewalo Marine Laboratory for generously sharing his knowledge and space over the course of these studies on Ptychodera flava. We would also like to thank members of the Swalla lab, Dr. Elena Levine Keeling (California Polytechnic State University) and Federico Brown, along with Dr. Maria Byrne (University of Sydney), Dr. Joel Smith (California Institute of Technology), Dr. Alexa Bely (University of Maryland) and Dr. Barbara Wakimoto (University of Washington) for critically reading the manuscript during its preparation. The research was supported by a Royalty Research Grant from the University of Washington to BJS. ALR was supported by NRSA Grant Number T32 HD007183-26A1 from NIH-NICHD.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rychel, A.L., Swalla, B.J. (2009). Regeneration in Hemichordates and Echinoderms. In: Rinkevich, B., Matranga, V. (eds) Stem Cells in Marine Organisms. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2767-2_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2767-2_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-2766-5
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-2767-2
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)