A friend put me onto a “neat” summation of the “Hox paradox” in Bioscience last year:
“Taken together, these findings presented researchers with a paradox. On one hand, the basic machinery underlying early development, such as the Hox genes, is widely conserved among divergent phyla. But at the same time, these genes also underlie the development of distinct morphologies between more closely related species. The resolution of this “Hox paradox” is that the general role of many genes in patterning the embryo has been preserved, but the precise pattern of their expression or their influence on later events of development have both changed. These modifications are possible only through changes in regulatory interactions, whether mediated through changes in protein or nucleic acid sequences.”
The Evolution of Gene Regulatory Interactions
David A. Garfield and Gregory A. Wray
Vol. 60, No. 1 (January 2010), pp. 15-23
Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the American Institute of Biological Sciences Article DOI: 10.1525/bio.2010.60.1.6
My friend finds the proposed solution underwhelming. Thoughts?