1. Developmental Biology
  2. Evolutionary Biology
Download icon

Evolutionary Developmental Biology: The Hox-TALE has been wagging for a long time

  1. David EK Ferrier  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of St Andrews, United Kingdom
  • Cited 1
  • Views 613
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2014;3:e02515 doi: 10.7554/eLife.02515


Hox and TALE proteins interact in a sea anemone, just as they do in flies and mice, indicating that the Hox-TALE system originated very early in animal evolution.

Main text

Animals come in many different shapes and sizes. Most of them—from worms and insects to fish and humans—are roughly symmetrical along a line that runs from the ‘head’ to the ‘tail’, and have a left side that mirrors the right side. However, there are notable examples of animals that do not show this bilateral symmetry, such as sponges and jellyfish. The origin of all of these animal forms, and ultimately ourselves, is entwined with the evolution of the developmental mechanisms that build animals. Moreover, many of the genes responsible for building humans are found in other animals, and they often do similar jobs in these different species. A good example is a subset of homeobox genes known as the ‘Hox genes’.

Hox genes are famous for often being found in clusters, with the order of the genes within the cluster matching the order in which these genes are first activated along the head-to-tail axis of the embryo. These genes code for Hox proteins that can interact with DNA to switch other genes ‘on’ or ‘off’. The number of different Hox proteins is relatively small, but they are able to target a wide spectrum of other genes, with their ability to bind to different target genes being modulated via interactions with other proteins known as co-factors. The ability of a relatively small number of Hox genes to specify the huge diversity of animal body forms observed in nature is a major puzzle in developmental biology.

Work on flies and mice has revealed that the major Hox co-factors belong to the so-called TALE class of homeobox genes (Holland et al., 2007). Now, in eLife, Bruno Hudry of Imperial College London, Samir Merabet of the Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle de Lyon and co-workers have uncovered the origin of this co–factor interaction by focussing on an early branch of the animal family tree, the cnidarians, which includes jellyfish, corals and anemones (Hudry et al., 2014).

We know that TALE genes, specifically those belonging to the PBC/Pbx and Meis families of genes, evolved before the origin of animals because copies of TALE genes are clearly present in some of the single-cell relatives of the multicellular animals. However, it has been difficult to determine when Hox genes evolved relative to the origin of animals. Some researchers have proposed that Hox genes evolved coincidently with the origin of animals, and were then lost in some early animal lineages (Mendivil Ramos et al., 2012). Others have suggested that they originated somewhere within the animal kingdom, some time after the divergence of the very earliest branches, such as the sponges (Ryan et al., 2010). Nevertheless, Hox genes had evolved by the time the cnidarian and bilaterian lineages split from each other. A second major point of debate is whether the Hox genes of cnidarians function in the same fashion as those in bilaterians.

Now Hudry et al.—who are based in the UK, France, Israel and Austria—establish that Hox-TALE protein–protein interactions occur in the cnidarians. This reveals that the Hox genes of bilaterians and those of the early animal lineages, like the cnidarians, are more similar than previously recognised.

Hudry et al. show that although there are TALE genes in the single-celled relatives of the animals, they lack some of the sequence motifs that are needed to interact with Hox proteins, and cannot form protein–protein complexes with each other. Only in animal lineages that contain unambiguous Hox genes—the cnidarians and the bilaterians—do these proteins have all of the necessary motifs to form these complexes. Intriguingly, in the starlet sea anemone, Nematostella vectensis, Hox-TALE complexes containing different Hox proteins bind to distinct DNA sequences. This is comparable to the different target sequences that are bound by distinct bilaterian Hox-TALE complexes, which in turn correspond to distinct functions along the head-tail axis of bilaterian embryos. Furthermore, this ‘axial’ difference in the activities of Hox proteins from the starlet sea anemone is also evident in the degree to which they rescue a nervous system mutation in the bilaterian fly, Drosophila melanogaster. This is despite the contentious issue, discussed by Hurdy et al., as to whether the ‘mouth’ end of the cnidarian body plan corresponds to the head or tail end of a bilaterian.

Assembly of the Hox-TALE complex typically involves one TALE protein—a PBC/Pbx protein—binding to a hexapeptide motif (HX) in the Hox protein. Some other homeobox genes also encode proteins with HX motifs, including the Msx gene of N. vectensis. Hudry et al. show that the Msx protein also forms a complex with the TALE proteins, and that this requires the HX motif. However, the formation of these Hox-TALE and Msx-TALE complexes does not occur in the exact same way in N. vectensis, with the latter requiring another TALE protein, called Meis, to be present. Furthermore, although mutating the HX motif can block the Hox-TALE complex, the presence of Meis can restore the complex, which demonstrates that further interaction motifs, besides the HX, are used by Hox proteins. Also, HX motifs are found in several non-Hox proteins across the animal kingdom. As such, understanding the different ways that these protein complexes can form—which probably reflects the diversity of functions that they perform—is likely to be of widespread importance.

The Hox/Pbx/Meis complex, which is essential for directing various aspects of axial development in the vast majority of animals, appears to have evolved in a somewhat piece-meal fashion. It was established by the time of the cnidarian-bilaterian ancestor and constitutes a key system around which so much of the diversity in animal body forms subsequently evolved. Evolutionary diversity clearly abounds within and between these early branches of the animals, however, with different patterns of gene loss (Peterson and Sperling, 2007; Ryan et al., 2013; Riesgo et al., 2014) and HX motifs being absent from some cnidarian Hox proteins. Consequently, wider sampling is still needed to help establish whether the Hox-TALE interactions characterised by Hudry et al. really did originate with the cnidarian-bilaterian ancestor or if, in fact, they were established even earlier.

The starlet sea anemone.

The cnidarians, such as the starlet sea anemone (N. vectensis) shown here, have a body form that is very different to the bilaterally symmetrical form found in most other animals. Anemones have a mouth surrounded by tentacles at one end and a foot that attaches to the substrate at the other. Hudry et al. have shown that, despite such a difference in general body form, the Hox-TALE system that operates in the development of cnidarians functions in a similar fashion to the Hox-TALE system of flies and mice.

Image: Cymothoa exigua.


  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
    The analysis of eight transrciptomes from all poriferan classes reveals surprising genetic complexity in sponges
    1. A Riesgo
    2. N Farrar
    3. PJ Windsor
    4. G Giribet
    5. SP Leys
    Molecular Biology and Evolution, 10.1093/molbev/msu057.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. David EK Ferrier

    Scottish Oceans Institute, Gatty Marine Laboratory, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    Competing interests
    The author declares that no competing interests exist.

Publication history

  1. Version of Record published: March 18, 2014 (version 1)


© 2014, Ferrier

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.


  • 613
    Page views
  • 37
  • 1

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Saishu Yoshida et al.
    Research Article

    Mammalian Hedgehog (Hh) signaling plays key roles in embryogenesis and uniquely requires primary cilia. Functional analyses of several ciliogenesis-related genes led to the discovery of the developmental diseases known as ciliopathies. Hence, identification of mammalian factors that regulate ciliogenesis can provide insight into the molecular mechanisms of embryogenesis and ciliopathy. Here, we demonstrate that DYRK2 acts as a novel mammalian ciliogenesis-related protein kinase. Loss of Dyrk2 in mice causes suppression of Hh signaling and results in skeletal abnormalities during in vivo embryogenesis. Deletion of Dyrk2 induces abnormal ciliary morphology and trafficking of Hh pathway components. Mechanistically, transcriptome analyses demonstrate down-regulation of Aurka and other disassembly genes following Dyrk2 deletion. Taken together, the present study demonstrates for the first time that DYRK2 controls ciliogenesis and is necessary for Hh signaling during mammalian development.

    1. Developmental Biology
    Ajun Geng et al.
    Research Article

    R-spondin1 (Rspo1) has been featured as a Wnt agonist, serving as a potent niche factor for stem cells in many tissues. Here we unveil a novel role of Rspo1 in promoting estrogen receptor alpha (Esr1) expression, hence regulating the output of steroid hormone signaling in the mouse mammary gland. This action of Rspo1 relies on the receptor Lgr4 and intracellular cAMP-PKA signaling, yet is independent of Wnt/β-catenin signaling. These mechanisms were reinforced by genetic evidence. Luminal cells-specific knockout of Rspo1 results in decreased Esr1 expression and reduced mammary side branches. In contrast, luminal cells-specific knockout of Wnt4, while attenuating basal cell Wnt/β-catenin signaling activities, enhances Esr1 expression. Our data reveal a novel Wnt-independent role of Rspo1, in which Rspo1 acts as a bona fide GPCR activator eliciting intracellular cAMP signaling. The identification of Rspo1-ERα signaling axis may have a broad implication in estrogen-associated diseases.