What sponges can tell us about the evolution of developmental processes
Abstract
Sponges are one of the simplest, and probably the oldest (earliest branching) multicellular lineage of extant animals. Although their embryonic development has been intensively studied in the late 19th and early 20th century, they have been mostly neglected by modern developmental biology. Recent interest in the evolution of development, aided by advances in sequencing technology, has brought the sponges back into the spotlight. It is known that the developmental toolkit of sponges includes signalling pathways, transcription factors and cell adhesion molecules that are employed during development of more complex animals (i.e. bilaterians). We are now beginning to understand how these conserved regulatory genes are used during the development of sponges. Methodological resources are now being developed for model species representing all major sponge lineages, potentially allowing us to gain insight into the evolutionary origin of animal developmental mechanisms.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Among the contentious basal metazoan clades, sponges likely retained the organization of the earliest metazoans and can provide clues to the origin of complex bilaterian body plans.
“Thus, among the three contentious 'basal' clades, sponges, which likely retained the organization of the earliest metazoans, can be expected to provide significant clues towards understanding the origin of the complex bilaterian body plans 4 .”
From Developmental gene expression provides clues to relationships between sponge and eumetazoan body plans (2014) · cites this paper as [4]
The developmental gene toolkit of sponges is surprisingly similar to the eumetazoan toolkit, although information on its expression remains limited.
“Importantly, the developmental gene toolkit of sponges is surprisingly similar to the eumetazoan toolkit, although information on its expression remains limited 4,7 .”
From Developmental gene expression provides clues to relationships between sponge and eumetazoan body plans (2014) · cites this paper as [4]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 112 · Cited by 65
- Authors
- Adamska, M., Degnan, B. M., Green, K., & Zwafink, C.
- Affiliations
- The University of Queensland (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Adamska, Maja
- Venue
- Zoology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2011-02
- Volume
- 114
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-10
- ISSN
- 0944-2006 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1992986416
- Cited by
- 65
- References
- 112
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 9
- FWCI
- 0.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Zoology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Paleontology › Marine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Developmental Biology and Gene Regulation
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biotechnology › Marine Sponges and Natural Products
- Keywords
- sponges, evolutionary developmental biology, embryonic development, developmental gene regulatory networks, signaling pathways, transcription factors, adhesion molecules, multicellularity
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Biological Evolution, Phylogeny, Porifera, Conserved Sequence, Wnt Proteins
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review