Humans, mice, and other animals with four limbs belong to a group of land-dwelling animals known as the tetrapods. This group of animals evolved from ancient fish and one crucial adaptation to life on land involved the modification of fins to form limbs. The front pair of limbs (the ‘arms’) evolved from the ‘pectoral’ fins of the ancient fish. These fins contain numerous bones that fan out from a set of bones called the pectoral girdle. However, most of the bones nearer the front side (the thumb side in the human limb) were lost in the ancestors of tetrapods as they moved onto land. Only the bone nearest the back remained as the ‘humerus’, which forms the upper part of the limb (i.e., the upper arm of humans).

In the embryos of mice and other animals, the limbs develop from structures called limb buds. For the limb to develop properly, the cells in the limb bud need to receive specific instructions that depend on their position in the bud. A protein called Gli3R provides cells with information about their position along the ‘anterior–posterior’ (or thumb-to-little finger) axis of the bud. This protein regulates several genes that are involved in limb development, and this results in different genes being expressed in cells along the anterior–posterior axis. For example, Alx4 is only expressed in a small area at the anterior end of the bud, while Hand2 expression is found in a large area towards the posterior part.

Gli3R is also found in a fish called the catshark, but it is not clear how it controls the formation of fins. Onimaru et al. show that the pattern of gene expression in the catshark fin bud is different to that of the mouse limb bud. For example, Alx4 is expressed in a larger area of the fin bud that extends further towards the posterior, while Hand2 is only found in a much smaller area at the posterior end of the bud. The experiments also suggest that Gli3R is active in a much larger area of the fin bud than in the limb bud.

Next, Onimaru et al. used a drug on the catshark embryos to increase the activity of another protein that can inhibit Gli3R. The fin buds of these shark had anterior shift in several gene expression domains, and the fins that formed were missing several anterior bones and had only a single bone connected to the pectoral girdle. Onimaru et al.'s findings suggest that during the evolution of the tetrapods, there may have been a shift in the anterior–posterior patterning of the fin bud to form a limb. An important area for future work will be to use genome-wide studies to study the fin/limb buds of other species.

Regulatory interactions between transcriptional factors play important roles for interpreting a morphogen gradient as positional information (Balaskas et al., 2012). Changes in these regulatory interactions may therefore be key players for patterning changes during morphological evolution. The fin-to-limb transformation is a prominent but still unsolved example of morphological evolution. 150 years ago Carl Gegenbaur subdivided the skeletal elements of shark pectoral fins into three segments along the anterior–posterior (AP) axis: propterygium, mesopterygium, and metapterygium (Gegenbaur, 1865) (Figure 1A), which are also found in the majority of chondrichthyans, none-teleost actinopterygians, placoderms, and acanthodians (Orvig, 1962; Coates, 1994, 2003). Therefore, possession of propterygium, mesopterygium, and metapterygium is considered to be a plesiomorphic state for gnathostomes. In the sarcopterygians (lobe-finned fishes including tetrapods), the propterygium and mesopterygium have been lost (Coates, 2003), thus, suggesting that anterior positional values have been lost or reduced during tetrapod evolution.

Figure 1 with 3 supplements see all

Download asset Open asset

In mouse limb buds, Hand2, Gli3, and Shh are key genes for controlling AP patterning (Riddle et al., 1993; Te Welscher et al., 2002). One of the earliest patterning events is the mutual transcriptional repression between Gli3 in the anterior tissue and Hand2 in the posterior (Te Welscher et al., 2002; Osterwalder et al., 2014). This early polarity in expression contributes to the subsequent posterior localized expression of Shh, and this morphogen in turn reinforces the anteriorly restricted Gli3 protein activity (Shh inhibits the default processing of the Gli3 protein to its repressor form (Gli3R), thus, creating a gradient of Gli3R along the AP axis) (Wang et al., 2000). Several studies on fin development of actinopterygians and chondrichthyans have revealed that posterior Shh expression is conserved among gnathostomes (Dahn et al., 2007; Davis et al., 2007; Yonei-Tamura et al., 2008; Sakamoto et al., 2009a). However, in fish fin development, the detailed roles of Shh signalling for AP patterning are not well studied and the role of the Hand2-Gli3 mutual interaction remains to be elucidated.

To investigate changes in AP patterning during the fin-to-limb transition, we first cloned a number of AP patterning genes from the non-model species Scyliorhinus canicula (Figure 1B–H and Figure 1—figure supplement 1 for phylogentic analyses). In the mouse limb bud, Alx4, Pax9, Hand1, and Zic3 are positively regulated by Gli3R (Te Welscher et al., 2002; Fernandez-Teran et al., 2003; McGlinn et al., 2005; Vokes et al., 2008) and thus are expressed in a localized anterior domain (one-third of the axis), while Hand2 and Tbx2 show broad posterior expression domains (two-thirds and one-half of the axis, respectively). In stage 30 S. canicula embryos (staged according to Ballard et al., 1993), we found instead that the anterior genes Alx4, Pax9, Hand1, and Zic3 were expressed in broad domains, which extend more posteriorly than in the mouse (half the fin bud for Alx4, two-thirds for Pax9 and Hand1, and the whole axis for Zic3, Figure 1B–E). By contrast, the Hand2 and Tbx2 domains were more posteriorly restricted in S. canicula fin buds than in mouse limb buds (Figure 1F,G). All of these 6 AP patterning genes show the same trend—their expression boundaries are more posterior in S. canicula fin buds (Figure 1H), apparently reflecting a gross shift in the AP coordinate system. We chose 3 of these genes to test at multiple time-points to determine whether this was a transient gene expression state (Figure 1—figure supplements 2, 3), but in all cases these shifts were observed from stage 29 to stage 31 (which covers ∼30 days of S. canicula development). In particular, stage 29 is a stage where Sox9 expression (a prechondrogenic marker) starts in the proximal part of the pectoral fin buds (Figure 1—figure supplement 2E), which suggest that the observed shift of AP values would affect proximal skeletal elements as well as distal.

Since the above AP patterning genes are regulated by Shh–Gli3 pathway (Te Welscher et al., 2002; Fernandez-Teran et al., 2003; McGlinn et al., 2005; Galli et al., 2010), we cloned Gli3 from S. canicula fin buds (Figure 2A and Figure 2—figure supplement 1A for phylogenetic tree) and analysed its expression in pectoral fin buds. In striking contrast to tetrapod limb buds (Büscher et al., 1997; Schweitzer et al., 2000), Gli3 expression is not restricted to the anterior region—thus again indicating a general posterior shift of AP positional values in the S. canicula. To address whether this situation is conserved in other chondrichthyans, we also cloned and analysed the expression of Gli3 in pectoral fin buds of a holocephalian, Callorhinchus milii, which has propterygium (Figure 2B), and again found expression in the posterior part of pectoral fin bud at stage 31 (staged according to Didier et al., 1998; Figure 2B). Since Hand2 is expressed posteriorly and thus now overlaps with Gli3, this strongly suggests that the Hand2–Gli3 mutual inhibition seen in tetrapods is weak or non-existent in chondrichthyans.

Figure 2 with 1 supplement see all

Download asset Open asset

In chick and mouse limb buds, Gli2 does not play a major role in AP patterning because of its weak processing efficiency to produce its repressor form (Wang et al., 2000). However, in zebrafish, Gli2 does indeed act as a repressor (Maurya et al., 2013), so we checked whether Gli2 could be playing the repressor role in S. canicula fin buds. First, we analysed Gli2 expression in S. canicula embryos and found it to be uniform until stage 29 (Figure 2C) and then subsequently restricted to the posterior region (Figure 2C). Second, we checked whether Gli3 and Gli2 of S. canicula have the repressor function, by measuring their processing efficiencies. We analysed the processing determinant domain (PDD), which determines the differential processing efficiencies of Gli3 and Gli2 in mice and humans (Pan and Wang, 2007). We inserted the PDDs from human Gli2 and S. canicula Gli2 or Gli3 into the human Gli3 PDD region (Figure 2D and Figure 2—figure supplement 1 for the amino acid sequences), transfected these constructs into HEK293 cells, and treated the cells with forskolin (FSK) to induce Gli processing. Human and S. canicula Gli2 PDD did not induce Gli3R, whereas their Gli3 PDDs did (Figure 2E). Thus, in S. canicula (as in chick and mouse), Gli3, but not Gli2, plays the major role in repressor production.

We next wished to explore if a genetic explanation could be found for the lack of Gli3 repression in the posterior part of pectoral fin buds of S. canicula and C. milii. To compare Gli3 enhancers in chondrichthyans and tetrapods, we used the VISTA enhancer browser (Visel et al., 2007) and found a limb-specific Gli3 enhancer, element 1586, which replicates anterior Gli3 expression in mouse limb buds. We identified the homologues of element 1586 in S. canicula and C. milii and compared them with those from other vertebrates. Consistent with the slow evolutionary rate of chondrichthyans and coelacanth (Amemiya et al., 2013; Renz et al., 2013; Venkatesh et al., 2014), element 1586 is conserved in tetrapods, coelacanth, and chondrichthyans, but not in gar, medaka, and zebrafish (Figure 3A). To assess whether the element 1586 in different species has different functionalities, we cloned this element from chick, S. canicula, and C. milii in front of a basal promoter followed by a GFP reporter (Ochi et al., 2012; Figure 3B). These constructs were electroporated into chick forelimb buds with a constitutively active RFP vector (to determine the spatial efficiency of electroporation). As with endogenous Gli3 expression (Büscher et al., 1997), the chick element 1586 drove GFP expression specifically in anterior tissue and was repressed in the posterior region, even though RFP was expressed throughout the buds (Figure 3C). The element 1586 from both S. canicula and C. milii also drove GFP expression in the chick limb buds, confirming that its general activity is conserved from sharks to tetrapods. However, in both cases, the specific posterior repression observed in the chick element was absent (Figure 3D,E). Thus, the differential activity of this enhancer (with tetrapods showing posterior repression, and chondrichthyans not) recapitulates the differences in Gli3 expression within these groups. Furthermore, by recombining S. canicula and chick enhancers, we identified a sequence that can exert the posterior repression when inserted into the S. canicula enhancer (Figure 3F,G and Figure 3—figure supplement 1). This sequence contains tetrapod or sarcopterygian-specific sequences, suggesting that the posterior repressive activity would have been acquired in a stepwise fashion.

Figure 3 with 1 supplement see all

Download asset Open asset

Finally, we wished to address whether changes to AP positional information could modify skeletal arrangement of the propterygium and mesopterygium in catshark. For this purpose, we explored methodologies for performing manipulative experiments on this very slow-developing non-model fish (see ‘Materials and methods’). We treated S. canicula embryos with retinoic acid (RA) to increase Shh-signalling activity (at stage 29 with 1 μg/ml of RA for 4 days). Activation of Shh signalling by RA is known to be conserved among vertebrate limbs/fins (Riddle et al., 1993; Hoffman et al., 2002; Dahn et al., 2007), and as expected, the most reliable Shh target gene, Ptch1 expression (Marigo et al., 1996; Vokes et al., 2008; and see Figure 1—figure supplement 1F for phylogenetic analysis) was increased and expanded anteriorly (Figure 4A). Consistent with this, Hand2 expression also extended anteriorly (Figure 4B)—probably due to inhibition of Gli3 repressor formation by ectopic activation of Shh signalling (as revealed by the extended Ptch1 expression). On the other hand, Pax9 expression (an anterior marker) was significantly downregulated and showed only weak expression in the anterior part of the fin buds (Figure 4C). The most anterior regions may not be sensitive to this treatment, as expression of Alx4 was not significantly shifted (Figure 4D), and this may be due to the lack of inhibitory regulation from Hand2 to Gli3 described above. To test whether the results of RA treatment were due to specific effects on AP patterning or instead due to a more general interference with limb development, we examined a marker for proximal-distal (PD) patterning in mouse and chick limb buds—Hoxa13 (Tamura et al., 1997; Mercader et al., 2000; Yashiro et al., 2004). In RA-treated pectoral fin buds, Hoxa13 expression was weaker than in control, but a shift in its expression domain was not seen (Figure 4E), showing that the impact of RA in these experiments is primarily on the AP patterning (the shifts of Ptch1, Hand2, and Pax9, Figure 4A–C), rather than on PD patterning or a general impact on development. Most intriguingly, we examined skeletal patterns of S. canicula pectoral fins in these partially ‘posteriorised’ fin buds (Figure 4F). Phenotypes varied from mild to severe but in all cases the appearance of distinct anterior elements (propterygium and mesopterygium) was lost. In the mild cases, a proximal element anterior to the metapterygium is attached to the pectoral girdle (single asterisk in Figure 4F). This proximal element may result from a fusion of the proximal parts of propterygium and mesopterygium. Whereas, the severe cases still have a fused element anterior to the metapterygial axis (double asterisk in Figure 4F), but this element is not directly attached to the pectoral girdle, indicating that the pectoral fin of the severe phenotype has lost the anterior proximal elements. By contrast, the posterior metapterygium itself was larger than normal, but retained its strong identity as the primary axis from which radial branching was observed. Although RA treatment potentially cause non-specific effects, given the clear affect on AP patterning (the shifts of Ptch1, Hand2, and Pax9, Figure 4A–C), while causing no obvious effects on PD patterning, the main cause of the phenotype is likely caused by the AP pattern change.

Figure 4

Download asset Open asset

In the present study, we have found that S. canicula pectoral fin buds have a gross posterior shift in the AP coordinate system compared to mouse limb buds. We show that S. canicula and C. milii lack a specific enhancer activity for Gli3, which in tetrapods mediates the posterior repression, and that this genetic difference likely contributes to the shift of AP positional information. Finally, RA treatment analyses suggest that a partial posteriorisation of S. canicula fin buds leads to a loss of anterior proximal elements (propterygium and mesopterygium). Thus, while the loss of the anterior proximal elements during evolution was associated with cis-regulatory changes of Gli3 in the RA experiments, it was driven by a Shh-mediated affect on the Gli3 protein itself, but in both cases achieving similar phenotypic changes by anterior shift in AP pattern. In support of our observations, a recent study also showed that anterior extension of Shh signalling accompanied with an anterior shift of Gli3 expression resulted in a loss of anterior skeletal elements in mouse limbs (Li et al., 2014). Considering all these data together, we therefore propose that one of the key events during the fin-to-limb transition was an anterior shift of AP positional information (a posteriorisation), which caused the loss of anterior proximal elements (Figure 4G).

In the RA treatment experiments, we also observed that the anterior distal radials reduced and only metapterygial radials retained, suggesting that anterior shift in AP positional information may also have had an impact on the distal radials during the fin-to-limb transformation. Interestingly, nearly 30 years ago, a classic study proposed that the distal end of the metapterygial axis (which has a uniformly posterior position in chondrychthians) bent anteriorly during acquisition of digits—the so-called digital arch model (Shubin and Alberch, 1986; Oster et al., 1988). Although the detailed validity of this model is unclear (Wagner and Larsson, 2007), there is a possibility that an AP shift in molecular patterning was involved in the acquisition of digits. In addition to our RA treatment analysis, knockdown analyses of actinotrichia proteins, which are components of fin rays and lost in tetrapod, show an anterior shift in several gene expressions in zebrafish pectoral fin buds (Zhang et al., 2010). Therefore, it is interesting to speculate that AP positional information may have shifted several times until the acquisition of digits.

We have shown that the Gli3 regulatory region of S. canicula and C. milii lacks the tetrapod-specific repressive element, which is likely needed for the Gli3–Hand2 interaction in mouse limb buds. In mice, Gli3^−/−; Hand2^−/c limbs show a severe dysplastic humerus (some of them have ectopic protrusion in humerus; Osterwalder et al., 2014), suggesting that the Gli3–Hand2 interaction has an important role for patterning the proximal elements. However, how Gli3 regulates the proximal skeletal pattern is not well understood even in mice. Although Gli3 is involved in the stylopod (humerus/femur) formation in mice, the phenotype in stylopod always appears with combination of other gene knockouts. For example, Gli3^−/−; Plzf^−/− mice lack a femur, and Gli3^−/−; Alx4^−/− mice exhibit humerus malformation (Barna et al., 2005; Panman et al., 2005). These facts suggest that evolutionary modification of Gli3 regulation is likely necessary, but additional regulatory modifications are required for the loss of the anterior elements. Since Alx4 and Hand2 are expressed in S. canicula pectoral fin bud, and Plzf is involved only in hindlimb development, currently there is no obvious candidate that would be involved in the loss of propterygium and mesopterygium. Although S. cacnicula genome has not been sequenced, systematic studies at genome-wide level such as ChIP-seq in S. cacnicula pectoral fin buds would be invaluable to provide a more complete picture of evolutionary mechanism of the loss of the anterior elements in the future.

In conclusion, by taking advantage of the slow evolutionary rates of chondrichthyian genomes, we were able to precisely compare the gene expression, function and regulation between pectoral fin and limb development, and discover a key difference between them. In particular, our study suggest that changes in morphogen interpretation by gene regulatory network mutations may have a major impact on morphological evolution.

1. 1. Onimaru K
   2. Tanaka M

   (2014) Scyliorhinus canicula Alx4 mRNA, complete cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: KC507187).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KC507187
2. 1. Onimaru K
   2. Tanaka M

   (2014) Scyliorhinus canicula Pax9 mRNA, partial cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: KC507188).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KC507188
3. 1. Onimaru K
   2. Tanaka M

   (2014) Scyliorhinus canicula Gli3 mRNA, partial cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: KC507189).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KC507189
4. 1. Onimaru K
   2. Kuraku S
   3. Takagi W
   4. Hyodo S
   5. Tanaka M

   (2014) Scyliorhinus canicula element 1586, genomic sequence, a fin/limb enhancer of Gli3

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: KF297619).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KF297619
5. 1. Onimaru K
   2. Kuraku S
   3. Takagi W
   4. Hyodo S
   5. Tanaka M

   (2014) Scyliorhinus canicula Hand1 mRNA, partial cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: KF748129).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KF748129
6. 1. Onimaru K
   2. Kuraku S
   3. Takagi W
   4. Hyodo S
   5. Sharpe J
   6. Tanaka M

   (2015) S. canicula Zic3 mRNA, partial cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: KP055652).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KP055652
7. 1. Onimaru K
   2. Kuraku S
   3. Takagi W
   4. Hyodo S
   5. Sharpe J
   6. Tanaka M

   (2015) S. canicula Tbx2 mRNA, partial cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: KP055651).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KP055651
8. 1. Onimaru K
   2. Kuraku S
   3. Takagi W
   4. Hyodo S
   5. Sharpe J
   6. Tanaka M

   (2015) S. canicula Ptch1 mRNA, partial cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: KP055653).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KP055653
9. 1. Onimaru K
   2. Kuraku S
   3. Takagi W
   4. Hyodo S
   5. Tanaka M

   (2015) C. milii Gli3 mRNA, partial cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: KF297620).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/KF297620

1. 1. Tanaka M
   2. Munsterberg A
   3. Anderson WG
   4. Prescott AR
   5. Hazon N
   6. Tickle C

   (2002) Scyliorhinus canicula dHand protein mRNA, partial cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: AY057890).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/AY057890
2. 1. Sakamoto K
   2. Onimaru K
   3. Munakata K
   4. Suda N
   5. Tamura M
   6. Ochi H
   7. Tanaka M

   (2009) Scyliorhinus canicula HoxA13 mRNA, partial cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: EU005550).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/EU005550
3. 1. Muller TS
   2. Ebensperger C
   3. Neubuser A
   4. Koseki H
   5. Balling R
   6. Christ B
   7. Wilting J

   (2015) Gallus gallus paired box 9 (PAX9), mRNA

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: NM_204912).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/NM_204912
4. 1. Takahashi M
   2. Tamura K
   3. Buscher D
   4. Masuya H
   5. Yonei-Tamura S
   6. Matsumoto K
   7. Naitoh-Matsuo M
   8. Takeuchi J
   9. Ogura K
   10. Shiroishi T
   11. Ogura T
   12. Izpisua Belmonte JC

   (2013) Gallus gallus ALX homeobox 4 (ALX4), mRNA

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: NM_204162).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/NM_204162
5. 1. Bollag RJ
   2. Siegfried Z
   3. Cebra-Thomas J
   4. Garvey N
   5. Davison EM
   6. Silver LM

   (1994) Mus musculus T-box 2 (Tbx2), mRNA

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: NM_009324).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/120407038
6. 1. Zhang G
   2. Cohn MJ

   (2009) Scyliorhinus canicula Sox9 (Sox9) mRNA, complete cds

   Publicly available at the NCBI Nucleotide (Accession no: EU241880).

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/EU241880

1. 1. Amemiya CT
   2. Alföldi J
   3. Lee AP
   4. Fan S
   5. Philippe H
   6. Maccallum I
   7. Braasch I
   8. Manousaki T
   9. Schneider I
   10. Rohner N
   11. Organ C
   12. Chalopin D
   13. Smith JJ
   14. Robinson M
   15. Dorrington RA
   16. Gerdol M
   17. Aken B
   18. Biscotti MA
   19. Barucca M
   20. Baurain D
   21. Berlin AM
   22. Blatch GL
   23. Buonocore F
   24. Burmester T
   25. Campbell MS
   26. Canapa A
   27. Cannon JP
   28. Christoffels A
   29. De Moro G
   30. Edkins AL
   31. Fan L
   32. Fausto AM
   33. Feiner N
   34. Forconi M
   35. Gamieldien J
   36. Gnerre S
   37. Gnirke A
   38. Goldstone JV
   39. Haerty W
   40. Hahn ME
   41. Hesse U
   42. Hoffmann S
   43. Johnson J
   44. Karchner SI
   45. Kuraku S
   46. Lara M
   47. Levin JZ
   48. Litman GW
   49. Mauceli E
   50. Miyake T
   51. Mueller MG
   52. Nelson DR
   53. Nitsche A
   54. Olmo E
   55. Ota T
   56. Pallavicini A
   57. Panji S
   58. Picone B
   59. Ponting CP
   60. Prohaska SJ
   61. Przybylski D
   62. Saha NR
   63. Ravi V
   64. Ribeiro FJ
   65. Sauka-Spengler T
   66. Scapigliati G
   67. Searle SM
   68. Sharpe T
   69. Simakov O
   70. Stadler PF
   71. Stegeman JJ
   72. Sumiyama K
   73. Tabbaa D
   74. Tafer H
   75. Turner-Maier J
   76. van Heusden P
   77. White S
   78. Williams L
   79. Yandell M
   80. Brinkmann H
   81. Volff JN
   82. Tabin CJ
   83. Shubin N
   84. Schartl M
   85. Jaffe DB
   86. Postlethwait JH
   87. Venkatesh B
   88. Di Palma F
   89. Lander ES
   90. Meyer A
   91. Lindblad-Toh K

   (2013) The African coelacanth genome provides insights into tetrapod evolution

   Nature 496:311–316.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12027

   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Balaskas N
   2. Ribeiro A
   3. Panovska J
   4. Dessaud E
   5. Sasai N
   6. Page KM
   7. Briscoe J
   8. Ribes V

   (2012) Gene regulatory logic for reading the sonic hedgehog signaling gradient in the vertebrate neural tube

   Cell 148:273–284.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2011.10.047

   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Ballard WW
   2. Mellinger J
   3. Lechenault H

   (1993) A series of normal stages for development of Scyliorhinus canicula, the lesser spotted dogfish (Chondrichthyes: Scyliorhinidae)

   Journal of Experimental Zoology 267:318–336.

   https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.1402670309

   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Barna M
   2. Pandolfi PP
   3. Niswander L

   (2005) Gli3 and Plzf cooperate in proximal limb patterning at early stages of limb development

   Nature 436:277–281.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03801

   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Bollag RJ
   2. Siegfried Z
   3. Cebra-Thomas J
   4. Garvey N
   5. Davison EM
   6. Silver LM

   (1994a)

   An ancient family of embryonically expressed mouse genes sharing a conserved protein motif with the T-locus

   Nature Genetics 7:383–389.

   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Bollag RJ
   2. Siegfried Z
   3. Cebra-Thomas J
   4. Garvey N
   5. Davison EM
   6. Silver LM

   (1994) Mus musculus T-box 2 (Tbx2), mRNA

   Mus musculus T-box 2 (Tbx2), mRNA, NCBI Nucleotide, NM_009324, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/120407038.

   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/120407038

   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Brudno M
   2. Malde S
   3. Poliakov A
   4. Do CB
   5. Couronne O
   6. Dubchak I
   7. Batzoglou S

   (2003) Glocal alignment: finding rearrangements during alignment

   Bioinformatics 19:i54–i62.

   https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btg1005

   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Büscher D
   2. Bosse B
   3. Heymer J
   4. Rüther U

   (1997) Evidence for genetic control of Sonic hedgehog by Gli3 in mouse limb development

   Mechanisms of Development 62:175–182.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-4773(97)00656-4

   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Coates M

   (2003) The evolution of paired fins

   Theory in Biosciences 122:266–287.

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s12064-003-0057-4

   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Coates M

    (1994)

    The origin of vertebrate limbs

    Development. Supplement pp. 169–180.

    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Dahn RD
    2. Davis MC
    3. Pappano WN
    4. Shubin NH

    (2007) Sonic hedgehog function in chondrichthyan fins and the evolution of appendage patterning

    Nature 445:311–314.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05436

    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Davis MC
    2. Dahn RD
    3. Shubin NH

    (2007) An autopodial-like pattern of Hox expression in the fins of a basal actinopterygian fish

    Nature 447:473–476.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05838

    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Didier DA
    2. Leclair EE
    3. Vanbuskirk DR

    (1998) Embryonic staging and external features of development of the chimaeroid fish, Callorhinchus milii (Holocephali, Callorhinchidae)

    Journal of Morphology 236:25–47.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4687(199804)236:1<25::AID-JMOR2>3.0.CO;2-N

    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Fernandez-Teran M
    2. Piedra ME
    3. Rodriguez-Rey JC
    4. Talamillo A
    5. Ros MA

    (2003) Expression and regulation of eHAND during limb development

    Developmental Dynamics 226:690–701.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/dvdy.10271

    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Frazer KA
    2. Pachter L
    3. Poliakov A
    4. Rubin EM
    5. Dubchak I

    (2004) VISTA: computational tools for comparative genomics

    Nucleic Acids Research 32:W273–W279.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkh458

    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Galli A
    2. Robay D
    3. Osterwalder M
    4. Bao X
    5. Bénazet J-D
    6. Tariq M
    7. Paro R
    8. Mackem S
    9. Zeller R

    (2010) Distinct roles of Hand2 in initiating polarity and posterior Shh expression during the onset of mouse limb bud development

    PLOS Genetics 6:e1000901.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000901

    • Google Scholar
17. Book

    1. Gegenbaur C

    (1865)

    Untersuchungen zur vergleichenden anatomie der wirbeltiere. Vol. II

    Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann.

    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Hamburger V
    2. Hamilton HL

    (1951) A series of normal stages in the development of the chick embryo

    Journal of Morphology 88:49–92.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/aja.1001950404

    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Hoffman L
    2. Miles J
    3. Avaron F
    4. Laforest L
    5. Akimenko MA

    (2002)

    Exogenous retinoic acid induces a stage-specific, transient and progressive extension of Sonic hedgehog expression across the pectoral fin bud of zebrafish

    The International Journal of Developmental Biology 46:949–956.

    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Lee K
    2. Avondo J
    3. Morrison H
    4. Blot L
    5. Stark M
    6. Sharpe J
    7. Bangham A
    8. Coen E

    (2006) Visualizing plant development and gene expression in three dimensions using optical projection tomography

    The Plant Cell 18:2145–2156.

    https://doi.org/10.1105/tpc.106.043042

    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Li D
    2. Sakuma R
    3. Vakili NA
    4. Mo R
    5. Puviindran V
    6. Deimling S
    7. Zhang X
    8. Hopyan S
    9. Hui C. chung

    (2014) Formation of proximal and anterior limb skeleton requires early function of Irx3 and Irx5 and is negatively regulated by shh signaling

    Developmental Cell 29:233–240.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2014.03.001

    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Marigo V
    2. Scott MP
    3. Johnson RL
    4. Goodrich LV
    5. Tabin CJ

    (1996)

    Conservation in hedgehog signaling: induction of a chicken patched homolog by Sonic hedgehog in the developing limb

    Development 122:1225–1233.

    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Maurya AK
    2. Ben J
    3. Zhao Z
    4. Lee RT
    5. Niah W
    6. Ng AS
    7. Iyu A
    8. Yu W
    9. Elworthy S
    10. van Eeden FJ
    11. Ingham PW

    (2013) Positive and negative regulation of gli activity by Kif7 in the zebrafish embryo

    PLOS Genetics 9:.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1003955

    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Mayor C
    2. Brudno M
    3. Schwartz JR
    4. Poliakov A
    5. Rubin EM
    6. Frazer KA
    7. Pachter LS
    8. Dubchak I

    (2000) VISTA: visualizing global DNA sequence alignments of arbitrary length

    Bioinformatics 16:1046–1047.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/16.11.1046

    • Google Scholar
25. 1. McGlinn E
    2. Van Bueren KL
    3. Fiorenza S
    4. Mo R
    5. Poh AM
    6. Forrest A
    7. Soares MB
    8. Bonaldo MDF
    9. Grimmond S
    10. Hui CC
    11. Wainwright B
    12. Wicking C

    (2005) Pax9 and Jagged1 act downstream of Gli3 in vertebrate limb development

    Mechanisms of Development 122:1218–1233.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mod.2005.06.012

    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Mercader N
    2. Leonardo E
    3. Piedra ME
    4. Martínez AC
    5. Ros MA
    6. Torres M

    (2000)

    Opposing RA and FGF signals control proximodistal vertebrate limb development through regulation of Meis genes

    Development 127:3961–3970.

    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Muller TS
    2. Ebensperger C
    3. Neubuser A
    4. Koseki H
    5. Balling R
    6. Christ B
    7. Wilting J

    (1996) Expression of avian Pax1 and Pax9 is intrinsically regulated in the pharyngeal endoderm, but depends on environmental influences in the paraxial mesoderm

    Developmental Biology 178:403–417.

    https://doi.org/10.1006/dbio.1996.0227

    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Muller TS
    2. Ebensperger C
    3. Neubuser A
    4. Koseki H
    5. Balling R
    6. Christ B
    7. Wilting J

    (2015) Gallus gallus paired box 9 (PAX9), mRNA

    Gallus gallus paired box 9 (PAX9), mRNA, NCBI Nucleotide, NM_204912, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/NM_204912.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/NM_204912

    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Nagase T
    2. Yamakawa H
    3. Tadokoro S
    4. Nakajima D
    5. Inoue S
    6. Yamaguchi K
    7. Itokawa Y
    8. Kikuno RF
    9. Koga H
    10. Ohara O

    (2008) Exploration of human ORFeome: high-throughput preparation of ORF clones and efficient characterization of their protein products

    DNA Research 15:137–149.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/dnares/dsn004

    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Niwa H
    2. Yamamura K
    3. Miyazaki J

    (1991)

    Efficient selection for high-expression transfectants with a novel eukaryotic vector

    Gene 108:193–199.

    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Ochi H
    2. Tamai T
    3. Nagano H
    4. Kawaguchi A
    5. Sudou N
    6. Ogino H

    (2012) Evolution of a tissue-specific silencer underlies divergence in the expression of pax2 and pax8 paralogues

    Nature Communications 3:848.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms1851

    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Orvig T

    (1962)

    Problèmes Actuels de Paléontologie. (Evolution des Vertébrés). Paris. Colloques Internationaux

    49–61, Problèmes Actuels de Paléontologie. (Evolution des Vertébrés). Paris. Colloques Internationaux, 104.

    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Oster GF
    2. Shubin N
    3. Murray JD
    4. Alberch P

    (1988) Evolution and morphogenetic rules: the shape of the vertebrate limb in ontogeny and phylogeny

    Evolution 42:862–884.

    https://doi.org/10.2307/2408905

    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Osterwalder M
    2. Speziale D
    3. Shoukry M
    4. Mohan R
    5. Ivanek R
    6. Kohler M
    7. Beisel C
    8. Wen X
    9. Scales SJ
    10. Christoffels VM
    11. Visel A
    12. Lopez-rios J
    13. Zeller R

    (2014) HAND2 targets define a network of transcriptional regulators that compartmentalize the early limb bud mesenchyme

    Developmental Cell 31:345–357.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2014.09.018

    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Pan Y
    2. Wang B

    (2007) A novel protein-processing domain in Gli2 and Gli3 differentially blocks complete protein degradation by the proteasome

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 282:10846–10852.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M608599200

    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Panman L
    2. Drenth T
    3. Tewelscher P
    4. Zuniga A
    5. Zeller R

    (2005) Genetic interaction of Gli3 and Alx4 during limb development

    The International Journal of Developmental Biology 49:443–448.

    https://doi.org/10.1387/ijdb.051984lp

    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Renz AJ
    2. Meyer A
    3. Kuraku S

    (2013) Revealing less derived nature of cartilaginous fish genomes with their evolutionary time scale inferred with nuclear genes

    PLOS ONE 8:e66400.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0066400

    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Riddle RD
    2. Johnson RL
    3. Laufer E
    4. Tabin C

    (1993) Sonic hedgehog mediates the polarizing activity of the ZPA

    Cell 75:1401–1416.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(93)90626-2

    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Roessler E
    2. Ermilov AN
    3. Grange DK
    4. Wang A
    5. Grachtchouk M
    6. Dlugosz AA
    7. Muenke M

    (2005) A previously unidentified amino-terminal domain regulates transcriptional activity of wild-type and disease-associated human GLI2

    Human Molecular Genetics 14:2181–2188.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddi222

    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Sakamoto K
    2. Onimaru K
    3. Munakata K
    4. Suda N
    5. Tamura M
    6. Ochi H
    7. Tanaka M

    (2009a) Heterochronic shift in Hox-mediated activation of Sonic hedgehog leads to morphological changes during fin development

    PLOS ONE 4:e5121.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005121

    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Sakamoto K
    2. Onimaru K
    3. Munakata K
    4. Suda N
    5. Tamura M
    6. Ochi H
    7. Tanaka M

    (2009) Scyliorhinus canicula HoxA13 mRNA, partial cds

    Scyliorhinus canicula HoxA13 mRNA, partial cds, NCBI Nucleotide, EU005550, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/EU005550.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/EU005550

    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Schweitzer R
    2. Vogan KJ
    3. Tabin CJ

    (2000) Similar expression and regulation of Gli2 and Gli3 in the chick limb bud

    Mechanisms of Development 98:171–174.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-4773(00)00458-5

    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Sharpe J
    2. Ahlgren U
    3. Perry P
    4. Hill B
    5. Ross A
    6. Hecksher-Sørensen J
    7. Baldock R
    8. Davidson D

    (2002) Optical projection tomography as a tool for 3D microscopy and gene expression studies

    Science 296:541–545.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1068206

    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Shubin NH
    2. Alberch P

    (1986)

    A morphogenetic approach to the origin and basic organization of the tetrapod limb

    Evolutionary Biology 20:318–390.

    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Suzuki T
    2. Ogura T

    (2008) Congenic method in the chick limb buds by electroporation

    Development, Growth & Differentiation 50:459–465.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-169X.2008.01054.x

    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Takagi W
    2. Kajimura M
    3. Bell JD
    4. Toop T
    5. Donald JA
    6. Hyodo S

    (2012) Hepatic and extrahepatic distribution of ornithine urea cycle enzymes in holocephalan elephant fish (Callorhinchus milii)

    Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology. Part B, Biochemistry & Molecular Biology 161:331–340.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpb.2011.12.006

    • Google Scholar
47. 1. Takahashi M
    2. Tamura K
    3. Buscher D
    4. Masuya H
    5. Yonei-Tamura S
    6. Matsumoto K
    7. Naitoh-Matsuo M
    8. Takeuchi J
    9. Ogura K
    10. Shiroishi T
    11. Ogura T
    12. Belmonte JC

    (1998)

    The role of Alx-4 in the establishment of anteroposterior polarity during vertebrate limb development

    Development 125:4417–4425.

    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Takahashi M
    2. Tamura K
    3. Buscher D
    4. Masuya H
    5. Yonei-Tamura S
    6. Matsumoto K
    7. Naitoh-Matsuo M
    8. Takeuchi J
    9. Ogura K
    10. Shiroishi T
    11. Ogura T
    12. Izpisua Belmonte JC

    (2013) Gallus gallus ALX homeobox 4 (ALX4), mRNA

    Gallus gallus ALX homeobox 4 (ALX4), mRNA, NCBI Nucleotide, NM_204162, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/NM_204162.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/NM_204162

    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Tamura K
    2. Peterson D
    3. Peterson N
    4. Stecher G
    5. Nei M
    6. Kumar S

    (2011) MEGA5: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis using maximum likelihood, evolutionary distance, and maximum parsimony methods

    Molecular Biology and Evolution 28:1530–1534.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msr121

    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Tamura K
    2. Yokouchi Y
    3. Kuroiwa A
    4. Ide H

    (1997) Retinoic acid changes the proximodistal developmental competence and affinity of distal cells in the developing chick limb bud

    Developmental Biology 188:224–234.

    https://doi.org/10.1006/dbio.1997.8627

    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Tanaka M
    2. Münsterberg A
    3. Anderson WG
    4. Prescott AR
    5. Hazon N
    6. Tickle C

    (2002a) Fin development in a cartilaginous fish and the origin of vertebrate limbs

    Nature 416:527–531.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/416527a

    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Tanaka M
    2. Munsterberg A
    3. Anderson WG
    4. Prescott AR
    5. Hazon N
    6. Tickle C

    (2002) Scyliorhinus canicula dHand protein mRNA, partial cds

    Scyliorhinus canicula dHand protein mRNA, partial cds, NCBI Nucleotide, AY057890, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/AY057890.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/AY057890

    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Te Welscher P
    2. Fernandez-Teran M
    3. Ros MA
    4. Zeller R

    (2002) Mutual genetic antagonism involving GLI3 and dHAND prepatterns the vertebrate limb bud mesenchyme prior to SHH signaling

    Genes & Development 16:421–426.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.219202

    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Thompson JD
    2. Gibson TJ
    3. Plewniak F
    4. Jeanmougin F
    5. Higgins DG

    (1997) The CLUSTAL_X windows interface: flexible strategies for multiple sequence alignment aided by quality analysis tools

    Nucleic Acids Research 25:4876–4882.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/25.24.4876

    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Venkatesh B
    2. Kirkness EF
    3. Loh Y-H
    4. Halpern AL
    5. Lee AP
    6. Johnson J
    7. Dandona N
    8. Viswanathan LD
    9. Tay A
    10. Venter JC
    11. Strausberg RL
    12. Brenner S

    (2007) Survey sequencing and comparative analysis of the elephant shark (Callorhinchus milii) genome

    PLOS Biology 5:e101.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0050101

    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Venkatesh B
    2. Lee AP
    3. Ravi V
    4. Maurya AK
    5. Lian MM
    6. Swann JB
    7. Ohta Y
    8. Flajnik MF
    9. Sutoh Y
    10. Kasahara M
    11. Hoon S
    12. Gangu V
    13. Roy SW
    14. Irimia M
    15. Korzh V
    16. Kondrychyn I
    17. Lim ZW
    18. Tay B-H
    19. Tohari S
    20. Kong KW
    21. Ho S
    22. Lorente-Galdos B
    23. Quilez J
    24. Marques-Bonet T
    25. Raney BJ
    26. Ingham PW
    27. Tay A
    28. Hillier LW
    29. Minx P
    30. Boehm T
    31. Wilson RK
    32. Brenner S
    33. Warren WC

    (2014) Elephant shark genome provides unique insights into gnathostome evolution

    Nature 505:174–179.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature12826

    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Visel A
    2. Minovitsky S
    3. Dubchak I
    4. Pennacchio LA

    (2007) VISTA Enhancer Browser—a database of tissue-specific human enhancers

    Nucleic Acids Research 35:D88–D92.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkl822

    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Vokes SA
    2. Ji H
    3. Wong WH
    4. McMahon AP

    (2008) A genome-scale analysis of the cis-regulatory circuitry underlying sonic hedgehog-mediated patterning of the mammalian limb

    Genes & Development 22:2651–2663.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.1693008

    • Google Scholar
59. Book

    1. Wagner GP
    2. Larsson HCE

    (2007)

    Fins into limbs: evolution, development, and transformation

    In: Hall BK, editors. Fins and limbs in the study of evolutionary novelties. The University of Chicago Press. pp. 49–61.

    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Wang B
    2. Fallon J
    3. Beachy P

    (2000) Hedgehog-regulated processing of Gli3 produces an anterior/posterior repressor gradient in the developing vertebrate limb

    Cell 100:423–434.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80678-9

    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Wang Q
    2. Arighi CN
    3. King BL
    4. Polson SW
    5. Vincent J
    6. Chen C
    7. Huang H
    8. Kingham BF
    9. Page ST
    10. Farnum Rendino M
    11. Thomas WK
    12. Udwary DW
    13. Wu CH

    (2012)

    Community annotation and bioinformatics workforce development in concert–Little Skate Genome Annotation Workshops and Jamborees

    Community annotation and bioinformatics workforce development in concert–Little Skate Genome Annotation Workshops and Jamborees, Database 2012, bar064.

    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Wurch T
    2. Lestienne F
    3. Pauwels PJ

    (1998) A modified overlap extension PCR method to create chimeric genes in the absence of restriction enzymes

    Biotechnology Techniques 12:653–657.

    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008848517221

    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Yashiro K
    2. Zhao X
    3. Uehara M
    4. Yamashita K
    5. Nishijima M
    6. Nishino J
    7. Saijoh Y
    8. Sakai Y
    9. Hamada H

    (2004) Regulation of retinoic acid distribution is required for proximodistal patterning and outgrowth of the developing mouse limb

    Developmental Cell 6:411–422.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1534-5807(04)00062-0

    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Yokoyama S
    2. Ito Y
    3. Ueno-Kudoh H
    4. Shimizu H
    5. Uchibe K
    6. Albini S
    7. Mitsuoka K
    8. Miyaki S
    9. Kiso M
    10. Nagai A
    11. Hikata T
    12. Osada T
    13. Fukuda N
    14. Yamashita S
    15. Harada D
    16. Mezzano V
    17. Kasai M
    18. Puri PL
    19. Hayashizaki Y
    20. Okado H
    21. Hashimoto M
    22. Asahara H

    (2009) A systems approach reveals that the myogenesis genome network is regulated by the transcriptional repressor RP58

    Developmental Cell 17:836–848.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2009.10.011

    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Yonei-Tamura S
    2. Abe G
    3. Tanaka Y
    4. Anno H
    5. Noro M
    6. Ide H
    7. Aono H
    8. Kuraishi R
    9. Osumi N
    10. Kuratani S
    11. Tamura K

    (2008) Competent stripes for diverse positions of limbs/fins in gnathostome embryos

    Evolution & Development 10:737–745.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-142X.2008.00288.x

    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Zhang G
    2. Cohn MJ

    (2009) Scyliorhinus canicula Sox9 (Sox9) mRNA, complete cds

    Scyliorhinus canicula Sox9 (Sox9) mRNA, complete cds, NCBI Nucleotide, EU241880, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/EU241880.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/EU241880

    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Zhang J
    2. Wagh P
    3. Guay D
    4. Sanchez-Pulido L
    5. Padhi BK
    6. Korzh V
    7. Andrade-Navarro MA
    8. Akimenko M-A

    (2010) Loss of fish actinotrichia proteins and the fin-to-limb transition

    Nature 466:234–237.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09137

    • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Koh Onimaru

   1. Graduate School of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Yokohama, Japan
   2. EMBL-CRG Systems Biology Research Unit, Centre for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain

   Contribution

   KO, Conception and design, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article, Contributed unpublished essential data or reagents

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

2. Shigehiro Kuraku

   Phyloinformatics Unit, RIKEN Center for Life Science Technologies, Kobe, Japan

   Contribution

   SK, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data, Contributed unpublished essential data or reagents

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

3. Wataru Takagi

   Laboratory of Physiology, Atmosphere and Ocean Research Institute, The University of Tokyo, Chiba, Japan

   Contribution

   WT, Acquisition of data, Contributed unpublished essential data or reagents

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

4. Susumu Hyodo

   Laboratory of Physiology, Atmosphere and Ocean Research Institute, The University of Tokyo, Chiba, Japan

   Contribution

   SH, Acquisition of data, Contributed unpublished essential data or reagents

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

5. James Sharpe

   1. EMBL-CRG Systems Biology Research Unit, Centre for Genomic Regulation, Barcelona, Spain
   2. Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Spain

   Contribution

   JS, Conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article

   For correspondence

   james.sharpe@crg.eu

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

6. Mikiko Tanaka

   Graduate School of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Yokohama, Japan

   Contribution

   MT, Conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article

   For correspondence

   mitanaka@bio.titech.ac.jp

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

• 5,254

  views

• 844

  downloads

• 49

  citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.