title: Testing the inhibitory cascade model in Mesozoic and Cenozoic mammaliaforms.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Much of the current research in the growing field of evolutionary development concerns relating developmental pathways to large-scale patterns of morphological evolution, with developmental constraints on variation, and hence diversity, a field of particular interest. Tooth morphology offers an excellent model system for such 'evo-devo' studies, because teeth are well preserved in the fossil record, and are commonly used in phylogenetic analyses and as ecological proxies. Moreover, tooth development is relatively well studied, and has provided several testable hypotheses of developmental influences on macroevolutionary patterns. The recently-described Inhibitory Cascade (IC) Model provides just such a hypothesis for mammalian lower molar evolution. Derived from experimental data, the IC Model suggests that a balance between mesenchymal activators and molar-derived inhibitors determines the size of the immediately posterior molar, predicting firstly that molars either decrease in size along the tooth row, or increase in size, or are all of equal size, and secondly that the second lower molar should occupy one third of lower molar area. Here, we tested the IC Model in a large selection of taxa from diverse extant and fossil mammalian groups, ranging from the Middle Jurassic (~176 to 161 Ma) to the Recent.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Results show that most taxa (~65%) fell within the predicted areas of the Inhibitory Cascade Model. However, members of several extinct groups fell into the regions where m2 was largest, or rarely, smallest, including the majority of the polyphyletic "condylarths". Most Mesozoic mammals fell near the centre of the space with equality of size in all three molars. The distribution of taxa was significantly clustered by diet and by phylogenetic group.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Overall, the IC Model was supported as a plesiomorphic developmental system for Mammalia, suggesting that mammal tooth size has been subjected to this developmental constraint at least since the divergence of australosphenidans and boreosphenidans approximately 180 Ma. Although exceptions exist, including many 'condylarths', these are most likely to be secondarily derived states, rather than alternative ancestral developmental models for Mammalia.
authors.affiliation: Department of Earth Sciences, University College London, Gower Street, London, UK. thomas.halliday.11@ucl.ac.uk
authors.forename: Thomas J D
authors.initials: TJ
authors.lastname: Halliday
authors.forename: Anjali
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Goswami
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D005075:Biological Evolution; D004032:Diet; D005580:Fossils; D008322:Mammals / Q000145:classification* / Q000235:genetics* / Q000254:growth & development; D008954:Models, Biological; D010802:Phylogeny; D014070:Tooth / Q000254:growth & development*
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Feb 20;93(4):1705-9
references.pmid: 11607634
references.citation: BMC Evol Biol. 2007 Jul 03;7:108
references.pmid: 17608930
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Sep 27;108(39):16333-8
references.pmid: 21930906
references.citation: Nature. 2001 Jan 4;409(6816):53-7
references.pmid: 11343108
references.citation: Evol Dev. 2005 Jan-Feb;7(1):29-41
references.pmid: 15642087
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Jan 23;104(4):1159-64
references.pmid: 17229835
references.citation: Nat Rev Genet. 2007 Dec;8(12):943-9
references.pmid: 17984972
references.citation: Nature. 2007 Sep 27;449(7161):427-32
references.pmid: 17898761
references.citation: Naturwissenschaften. 2006 Aug;93(8):407-11
references.pmid: 16865388
references.citation: BMC Evol Biol. 2010 Apr 20;10:102
references.pmid: 20406454
references.citation: Proc Biol Sci. 2012 Sep 7;279(1742):3491-500
references.pmid: 22628470
references.citation: Nature. 2007 Jun 21;447(7147):1003-6
references.pmid: 17581585
references.citation: J Evol Biol. 2012 Oct;25(10):2102-2111
references.pmid: 22901059
references.citation: Evolution. 2009 May;63(5):1327-40
references.pmid: 19187252
references.citation: Nature. 2005 Mar 24;434(7032):497-501
references.pmid: 15791254
references.citation: Nature. 2010 Mar 25;464(7288):583-6
references.pmid: 20220757
references.citation: Ecol Evol. 2013 Feb;3(2):278-85
references.pmid: 23467478
references.citation: Nature. 2007 Sep 27;449(7161):413-5
references.pmid: 17898756