Adaptive plasticity in the mouse mandible

BMC Evolutionary Biology

Emily J Rayfield³  Sabrina Renaud²  Philip SL Anderson¹ 

[1] Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA;Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, CNRS, Université Lyon 1, 69622 Villeurbanne, France;School of Earth Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

关键词: Modularity;    Geometric morphometrics;    Adaptation;    Jaws;    Mice;    Biomechanics;   

Others  :  856711
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2148-14-85

 received in 2013-11-26, accepted in 2014-04-09,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Plasticity, i.e. non-heritable morphological variation, enables organisms to modify the shape of their skeletal tissues in response to varying environmental stimuli. Plastic variation may also allow individuals to survive in the face of new environmental conditions, enabling the evolution of heritable adaptive traits. However, it is uncertain whether such a plastic response of morphology constitutes an evolutionary adaption itself. Here we investigate whether shape differences due to plastic bone remodelling have functionally advantageous biomechanical consequences in mouse mandibles. Shape characteristics of mandibles from two groups of inbred laboratory mice fed either rodent pellets or ground pellets mixed with jelly were assessed using geometric morphometrics and mechanical advantage measurements of jaw adductor musculature.

Results

Mandibles raised on diets with differing food consistency showed significant differences in shape, which in turn altered their biomechanical profile. Mice raised on a soft food diet show a reduction in mechanical advantage relative to mice of the same inbred strain raised on a typical hard food diet. Further, the soft food eaters showed lower levels of integration between jaw regions, particularly between the molar and angular region relative to hard food eaters.

Conclusions

Bone remodelling in mouse mandibles allows for significant shifts in biomechanical ability. Food consistency significantly influences this process in an adaptive direction, as mice raised on hard food develop jaws better suited to handle hard foods. This remodelling also affects the organisation of the mandible, as mice raised on soft food appear to be released from developmental constraints showing less overall integration than those raised on hard foods, but with a shift of integration towards the most solicited regions of the mandible facing such a food, namely the incisors. Our results illustrate how environmentally driven plasticity can lead to adaptive functional changes that increase biomechanical efficiency of food processing in the face of an increased solicitation. In contrast, decreased demand in terms of food processing seems to release developmental interactions between jaw parts involved in mastication, and may generate new patterns of co-variation, possibly opening new directions to subsequent selection. Overall, our results emphasize that mandible shape and integration evolved as parts of a complex system including mechanical loading food resource utilization and possibly foraging behaviour.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Anderson et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Price TD, Qvarnström A, Irwin DE: The role of phenotypic plasticity in driving genetic evolution. Proc Roy Soc B 2003, 270:1433-1440.
• [2]West-Eberhard MJ: Toward a modern revival of Darwin’s theory of evolutionary novelty. Phil Sci 2006, 75(5):899-908.
• [3]Ghalambor CK, McKay JK, Carroll SP, Reznick DN: Adaptive versus non-adaptive phenotypic plasticity and the potential for contemporary adaptation in new environments. Func Ecol 2007, 21:394-407.
• [4]Scoville AG, Pfrender ME: Phenotypic plasticity facilitates recurrent rapid adaptation to introduced predators. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010, 107:4260-4263.
• [5]Moczek AP, Sultan S, Foster S, Ledon-Rettig C, Dworking I, Nijhout HF, Abouheif E, Pfennig DW: The role of developmental plasticity in evolutionary innovation. Proc Roy Soc B 2011, 278:2705-2713.
• [6]Losos JB, Créer DA, Glossip D, Goellner R, Hampton A, Roberts G, Haskell N, Taylor P, Etling J: Evolutionary implications of phenotypic plasticity in the hindlimb of the lizard Anolis sagrei. Evolution 2000, 54:301-305.
• [7]Badyaev AV: Stress-induced variation in evolution: from behavioural plasticity to genetic assimilation. Proc Roy Soc B 2005, 272:877-886.
• [8]Suzuki Y, Nijhout HF: Evolution of a polyphenism by genetic accommodation. Science 2006, 311:650-652.
• [9]Frost HM: Bone “mass” and the “mechanostat”: a proposal. Anat Rec 1987, 219:1-9.
• [10]Tanaka E, Sano R, Kawai N, Langenbach GEJ, Brugman P, Tanne K, van Eijden TMG: Effect of food consistency on the degree of mineralization in the rat mandible. Ann Biomed Engin 2007, 35:1617-1621.
• [11]Zelditch ML, Lundrigan BL, Sheets HD, Garland TJ: Do precocial mammals develop at a faster rate? A comparison of rates of skull development in Sigmodon fulviventer and Mus musculus domesticus. J Evol Biol 2003, 16:708-720.
• [12]Yamada K, Kimmel DB: The effect of dietary consistency on bone mass and turnover in the growing rat mandible. Arch Oral Biol 1991, 36:129-138.
• [13]Mavropoulos A, Bresin A, Kiliardis S: Morphometric analysis of the mandible in growing rats with different masticatory functional demands: adaptation to an upper posterior bite block. Eur J Oral Sci 2004, 112:259-266.
• [14]Mavropoulos A, Ammann P, Bresin A, Kiliardis S: Masticatory demands induce region-specific changes in mandibular bone density in growing rats. Angle Orthod 2005, 75:625-630.
• [15]Renaud S, Auffray J-C, de La Porte S: Epigenetic effects on the mouse mandible: common features and discrepancies in remodeling due to muscular dystrophy and response to food consistency. BMC Evol Biol 2010, 10:28-40. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Swiderski DL, Zeldith ML: The complex ontogenetic trajectory of mandibular shape in a laboratory mouse. J Anat 2013, 223:568-580.
• [17]Atchley WR, Hall BK: A model for development and evolution of complex morphological structures. Biol Rev 1991, 66(2):101-157.
• [18]Klingenberg CP, Leamy LJ, Routman EJ, Cheverud JM: Genetic architecture of mandible shape in mice: effects of quantitative trait loci analyzed by geometric morphometrics. Genetics 2001, 157:785-802.
• [19]Zelditch ML, Wood AR, Bonett RM, Swiderski DL: Modularity of the rodent mandible: integrating bones, muscles, and teeth. Evol Dev 2008, 10:756-766.
• [20]Renaud S, Alibert P, Auffray J-C: Modularity as a source of new morphological variation in the mandible of hybrid mice. BMC Evol Biol 2012, 12:141. BioMed Central Full Text
• [21]Radinsky LB: Evolution of skull shape in carnivores. I. Representative modern carnivores. Biol J Linn Soc 1981, 15:369-388.
• [22]Greaves WS: A functional analysis of carnassial biting. Biol J Linn Soc 1983, 20:353-363.
• [23]Thomason JJ: Cranial strength in relation to estimated biting forces in some mammals. Can J Zool 1991, 69:2326-2333.
• [24]Hiiemae KM: The structure and function of the jaw muscles in the rat (Rattus norvegicus L.) III. The mechanics of the muscles. Zool J Linn Soc 1971, 50:111-132.
• [25]Hylander WL, Johnson KR, Crompton AW: Loading patterns and jaw movements during mastication in Macaca fascicularis: a bone-strain, electromyographic, and cineradiographic analysis. Am J Phys Anthropol 1987, 72:287-314.
• [26]Baverstock H, Jeffery NS, Cobb SN: The morphology of the mouse masticatory musculature. J Anat 2013, 223:46-60.
• [27]Arnold BC, Brockett PL: On distributions whose component ratios are cauchy. Amer Stat 1992, 46:25-26.
• [28]Klingenberg CP, Navarro N: Development of the mouse mandible: a model system for complex morphological structures. In Evolution of the house mouse. Edited by Macholán M, Baird SJE, Munclinger P, Piálek J. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012:135-149.
• [29]Monteiro LR, Bonato V, dos Reis SF: Evolutionary integration and morphological diversification in complex morphological structures: mandible shape divergence in spiny rats (Rodentia, Echimyidae). Evol & Dev 2005, 7:429-439.
• [30]Rohlf FJ: TPSDIG, version 2.10. Stony Brook, NY: SUNY: Department of Ecology and Evolution; 2006. [available via http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/ webcite]
• [31]Rohlf FJ: TPSRELW, version 1.45. Stony Brook, NY: SUNY: Department of Ecology and Evolution; 2007. [available via http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/morph/ webcite]
• [32]Adams DC, Rohlf FJ, Slice DE: Geometric morphometrics: ten years of progress following the ‘revolution’. Ital J Zool 2004, 71:5-16.
• [33]Sheets HD, Keonho K, Mitchell CEA: Combined landmark and outline-based approach to ontogenetic shape change in the Ordovician Trilobite Triarthrus becki. In Applications of morphometrics in Paleontology and Biology. Edited by Elewa A. New York: Springer; 2004:67-81.
• [34]Sampson PD, Bookstein FL, Sheehan H, Bolson EL: Eigenshape analysis of left ventricular outlines from contrast ventriculograms. In Advances in morphometrics. Vol. 284. Edited by Marcus LF, Corti M, Loy A, Naylor GJP, Slice DE. New York: Plenum; 1996:131-152. [Nato ASI Series, Series A: Life Science]
• [35]Andresen PR, Bookstein FL, Conradsen K, Ersbøll B, Marsh J, Kreiborg S: Surface-bounded growth modeling applied to human mandibles. IEEE Trans Med Imag 2000, 19:1053-1063.
• [36]Bookstein FL, Streissguth AP, Sampson PD, Connor PD, Barr HM: Corpus callosum shape and neuropsychological deficits in adult males with heavy fetal alcohol exposure. Neuroimage 2002, 15:233-251.
• [37]Klingenberg CP: Morphometric integration and modularity in configurations of landmarks: tools for evaluating a priori hypotheses. Evol & Dev 2009, 11:405-421.
• [38]Dray S, Dufour A-B: The ade4 package: implementing the duality diagrams for ecologists. J Stat Soft 2007, 22:1-20.
• [39]Liu J, Aoki M, Illa I, Wu C, Fardeau M, Angelini C, Serrano C, Urtizberea JA, Hentati F, Hamida MB, Bohlega S, Culper EJ, Amato AA, Bossie K, Oeltjen J, Bejaoui K, McKenna-Yasek D, Hosler BA, Schurr E, Arahata K, de Jong PJ, Brown RH Jr: Dysferlin, a novel skeletal muscle gene, is mutated in Miyoshi myopathy and limb girdle muscular dystrophy. Nat Genet 1998, 20:31-36.
• [40]Whitaker JO: Food of Mus musculus, Peromyscus maniculatus and Peromyscus leucopus in Vigo County. Indiana J Mamm 1966, 47:473-486.
• [41]Newsome AE: A population study of house mice temporarily inhabiting a South Australian wheat field. J Anim Ecol 1969, 38:341-359.
• [42]Young NM, Wagner GP, Hallgrimsson B: Development and the evolvability of human limbs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010, 107(8):3400-3405.
• [43]Michaux J, Chevret P, Renaud S: Morphological diversity of old world rats and mice (Rodentia, Muridae) mandible in relation with phylogeny and adaptation. J Zool Sys Evol Res 2007, 45:263-279.
• [44]Berry RJ: Town mouse, Country mouse: adaptation and adaptability in Mus domesticus (M. musculus domesticus). Mamm Rev 1981, 11:91-136.
• [45]Berry RJ: Small mammal differentiation on islands. Phil Trans Roy Soc B 1996, 351:753-764.
• [46]Copson GR: The diet of introduced rodents Mus musculus L. and Rattus rattus L. on subantarctic macquarie island. Aust Wildl Res 1986, 13:441-445.
• [47]Le Roux V, Chapuis J-L, Frenot Y, Vernon P: Diet of the house mouse (Mus musculus) on Guillou Island, Kerguelen archipelago. Subantarctic Pol Biol 2002, 25:49-57.
• [48]Smith VR, Avenant NL, Chown SL: The diet and impact of house mice on a sub-Antarctic island. Polar Biol 2002, 25:703-715.
• [49]Renaud S, Auffray J-C: Adaptation and plasticity in insular evolution of the house mouse mandible. J Zool Systemat Evol Res 2010, 48(2):138-150.
• [50]Renaud S, Hardouin EA, Pisanu B, Chapuis J-L: Invasive house mice facing a changing environment on the Sub-Antarctic Guillou Island (Kerguelen Archipelago). J Evol Biol 2013, 26:612-624.