Abstract
Most studies in mammals and birds have demonstrated common patterns of hypothalamic development highlighted by the combination of developmental regulatory genes (genoarchitecture), supporting the notion of the hypothalamus as a component of the secondary prosencephalon, topologically rostral to the diencephalon. In our comparative analysis we have summarized the data on the expression patterns of different transcription factors and neuroactive substances, used as anatomical markers, in the developing hypothalamus of the amphibian Xenopus laevis and the juvenile turtle Pseudemys scripta. This analysis served to highlight the organization of the hypothalamus in the anamniote/amniotic transition. We have identified supraoptoparaventricular and the suprachiasmatic regions (SCs) in the alar part of the hypothalamus, and tuberal and mammillary regions in the basal hypothalamus. Shared features in the two species are: (1) The supraoptoparaventricular region (SPV) is defined by the expression of Otp and the lack of Nkx2.1/Isl1. It is subdivided into rostral, rich in Otp and Nkx2.2, and caudal, only Otp-positive, portions. (2) The suprachiasmatic area contains catecholaminergic cell groups and lacks Otp, and can be further divided into rostral (rich in Nkx2.1 and Nkx2.2) and a caudal (rich in Isl1 and devoid of Nkx2.1) portions. (3) Expression of Nkx2.1 and Isl1 define the tuberal hypothalamus and only the rostral portion expresses Otp. (4) Its caudal boundary is evident by the lack of Isl1 in the adjacent mammillary region, which expresses Nkx2.1 and Otp. Differences in the anamnio-amniote transition were noted since in the turtle, like in other amniotes, the boundary between the alar hypothalamus and the telencephalic preoptic area shows distinct Nkx2.2 and Otp expressions but not in the amphibian (anamniote), and the alar SPV is defined by the expression of Otp/Pax6, whereas in Xenopus only Otp is expressed.
The hypothalamus within the current prosomeric model
The hypothalamus is considered the forebrain territory par excellence dedicated to control homeostatic processes, and its neuroanatomical regionalization has been a much debated topic in recent years. The term “hypothalamus” was coined during the last century with the beginning of neuroanatomical studies (His, ,), following a columnar conception of the brain (Herrick, ; Kuhlenbeck, ). This was based on the idea that the forebrain is organized in longitudinal functional units homologous to the ones in the brainstem and it was considered that the ventricular sulci marked the straight longitudinal axis of the forebrain, ending somewhere in the telencephalon (Herrick, ; Kuhlenbeck, ). Following this concept and the analysis of classical “transverse” sections, the hypothalamus was defined as a diencephalic region beneath the thalamus (from the old Greek ÿpó: under). However, the hypothalamus is formed, as the rest of the forebrain, from the anterior neural plate through complex processes of morphogenesis. As a result, this brain region in the mature brain is highly distorted, mainly by the sharp flexure of the longitudinal brain axis and by differential degree of development of its components. These phenomena make it difficult to identify the basic units or subdivisions in the mature hypothalamus and understand the topological relationships between them. Moreover, the variable degree of elaboration and differentiation of structures in the hypothalamus of the different vertebrates obscures the interpretation of anatomical data and the comparison across species, and greatly complicates studies of forebrain evolution (Butler and Hodos, ; Bruce, ; Hodos, ; Nieuwenhuys et al., ).
Twenty years ago, the first proposal of the prosomeric model pointed out several evidences to discard the columnar paradigm of the forebrain organization, revealing the discrepancy between the traditional anatomical landmarks and the morphogenetic organization of the brain, what eventually led to refute the boundary role of the ventricular sulci (Puelles and Rubenstein, ; Rubenstein et al., ; Puelles, ). In this model, the forebrain is organized into transverse segments (prosomeres) and longitudinal zones defined by differential expression patterns of several developmental regulatory genes that establish the internal boundaries. According to the original prosomeric model and its subsequent revisions (Puelles and Rubenstein, , ; Puelles, , ; Puelles et al., ) the hypothalamus is excluded from the diencephalon, which is composed of three neuromeres (prosomeres P1–P3). The rostralmost forebrain is designated the secondary prosencephalon that contains the hypothalamus (rostral to the diencephalic P3), the telencephalon impar, and the telencephalic hemispheres (Puelles and Rubenstein, ). The interpretation of the parts of the secondary prosencephalon is fraught with difficulties, mainly derived from the early optic and hemispheric evaginations and the different degree of development shown across vertebrates that disturb the primary pattern of this region (Nieuwenhuys et al., ). However, morphological, molecular, and hodological results have progressively contributed to highlight the organization of the main parts of the secondary prosencephalon and its subdivisions, particularly in mice, where different organization models have been proposed (Figdor and Stern, ; Puelles and Rubenstein, ; Shimogori et al., ; Diez-Roux et al., ; Morales-Delgado et al., , ; Puelles et al., ). Recently, in our group we applied similar developmental gene expression criteria to the identification of hypothalamic components in amphibians and reptiles (Moreno et al., ; Domínguez et al., , ). We selected representative species of these vertebrate classes for their importance in evo-devo studies with a phylogenetic perspective. Amphibians constitute the only group of tetrapod anamniotes and represent a key model in anamniote/amniote transition, as they share features with other tetrapods (amniotes) and also with other anamniotes. In turn, reptiles occupy a crucial position, especially turtles, which were reported to be the most closely related to the extinct therapsids from which mammals arose (Northcutt, ), although, alternatively, they have been considered the sister group to crocodiles and birds (Zardoya and Meyer, 2001a,b). Therefore, the study of these vertebrate groups appears particularly relevant since the colonization of land by tetrapod ancestors is presumably one of the evolutionary events that could involve more neural changes.
Within the current anatomical context, we now define the hypothalamic boundaries with its neighboring forebrain areas on the basis of distinct molecular profiles during development. Thus, gene expression data have highlighted that the preoptic area does not belong to the hypothalamus but it is part of the subpallial telencephalic territory (Flames et al., ; Medina, ; Garcia-Lopez et al., ; Sánchez-Arrones et al., ; Zhao et al., 2009; Roth et al., ) and is topologically adjacent to the dorsal hypothalamic territory. The caudal hypothalamo-diencephalic boundary is highlighted by the distinct Six3, Lhx9, Arx and Dlx expression in the prethalamic territory (P3), as well as the Otx2 expression in the diencephalon, but not in the hypothalamus (Puelles et al., ,).
The longitudinal domains of the alar and basal plates, which extend along the neuraxis, also extend to the hypothalamus and the alar–basal boundary is considered to end rostrally just behind the optic chiasm in all vertebrates (Puelles, ). The expression of the gene Nkx2.2 along the alar–basal boundary in the caudal prosencephalon continues rostrally in the hypothalamus, which allows distinguishing between alar and basal territories (Shimamura et al., ). The recently updated prosomeric model in mammals (see Figure 1) holds that the hypothalamus is subdivided dorsoventrally into alar, basal, and floor longitudinal domains and separates rostrocaudally, by the intrahypothalamic boundary (IHB), into two transverse regions called terminal hypothalamus (THy; rostral; hp2: hypothalamic prosomeric domain 2) and peduncular hypothalamus (PHy; caudal, hp1:hypothalamic prosomeric domain 1). The main forebrain bundles course dorsoventrally along PHy, which is also characterized by the generation of highly characteristic structures such as the main paraventricular nucleus, the retromammillary area and the migrated subthalamic nucleus (Puelles et al., ). The THy contains the main tuberal and mammillary regions, as well as the supraoptic, suprachiasmatic, and retrochiasmatic areas. The THy includes a rostromedian subdomain recently named acroterminal area, with specializations such as the lamina terminalis (and related vascular organ), suprachiasmatic, and chiasmatic alar areas, and the anterobasal, arcuate, median eminence, and infundibular/neurohypophysial basal areas (Puelles et al., ). During development, Six6 and Foxb1 gene expression apparently delineates the entire acroterminal territory. Although the structures included in the acroterminal part are obviously present in reptiles and amphibians (see ten Donkelaar, 1998a,b), developmental studies did not reveal specific markers for the origin of this hypothalamic part (Moreno et al., ; Domínguez et al., , ).
Figure 1
In the alar hypothalamus, the dorsal domain is adjacent to the telencephalic preoptic area and expresses the transcrition factors Tbr1, Sim1 and Otp (Medina,
Hypothalamic organization in the anamnio-amniotic transition: evolutionary traits on hypothalamic regionalization
The achievement of new tools in developmental neuroanatomy for the analysis of the genoarchitecture of particular brain regions has led to the precise interpretation of the hypothalamic regionalization, and the definition of different hypothalamic progenitor domains, which were traditionally linked to anatomical landmarks that not always coincided with the molecular boundaries. Thus, the analysis of the patterns of distribution of main regulatory transcription factors and proteins involved in neural patterning, and that are also expressed after development, have allowed to determine the extent of the different hypothalamic histogenetic divisions. In addition, the molecular boundaries with the adjacent non-hypothalamic territories could be assessed. Comparative studies using the same sets of markers in different vertebrates, particularly amphibians and reptiles, have highlighted that the main molecular features of the subdivisions topologically identified in the hypothalamus have been highly conserved (Medina,
Table 1
| Lamprey | Zebrafish | Lungfish | Xenopus | Turtle | Chick | Mouse | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| POH | —— | —— | —— | —— | Nkx2.2 (Moreno et al., | DIx5/Nkx2.2 (Bardet et al., | DIx2/Nkx2.2 (Flames et al., | |
| SPV | -Pax6 (Murakami et al., | -Pax6 (Moreno and González, | -Pax6 (Moreno et al., | Pax6 (Moreno et al., | Pax6 (Flames et al., | |||
| Nkx2.2 (Domínguez et al., | Nkx2.2 (Moreno et al., | Nkx2.2 (Caqueret et al., | ||||||
| Otp (Del Giacco et al., | Otp (Moreno and González, | Otp (Bardet et al., | Otp (Moreno et al., | Otp (Bardet et al., | Otp (Puelles and Rubenstein, | |||
| Lhx5 (Domínguez et al., | Lhx5 (Abellán et al., | Lhx5 (Abellán et al., | ||||||
| SC | Nkx2.1/Shh (Rohr et al., | Nkx2.1 (Moreno and González, | Nkx2.1/2.2/Shh (Domínguez et al., | Nkx2.1/2.2 (Moreno et al., | Nkx2.1/2.2/Shh (Bardet et al., | -Nkx2.1/Shh (Puelles and Rubenstein, | ||
| DIx (Martínez-de-la-Torre et al., | DIx (Medina, | IsI1 (Moreno and González, | Dlx/Isl1 (Brox et al., | Isl1 (Moreno et al., | Dlx/Isl1 (Abellán and Medina, | DIx (Puelles and Rubenstein, | ||
| Lhx1/Lhx7 (Moreno et al., | Lhx7 (Abellán and Medina, | Lhx1/Lhx7 (Abellán et al., | ||||||
| Otp (Moreno and González, | Otp (Domínguez et al., | Otp (Moreno et al., | Otp (Bardet et al., | Otp (Morales-Delgado et al., | ||||
| Tub | | | | Nkx2.1/Shh (Osorio et al., | Nkx2.1/Shh (Wolf and Ryu, 2013) | Nkx2.1/2.2 (Moreno and González, | Nkx2.1/2.2/Shh (Domínguez et al., | Nkx2.1 (Moreno et al., | Nkx2.1/Shh (Medina, | Nkx2.1/2.2/Shh (Puelles and Rubenstein, | |
| BH | | | | DIx (Martínez-de-la-Torre et al., | Isl1 (Moreno and González, | Dlx/Isl1 (Brox et al., | Isl1 (Moreno et al., | Dlx/Isl1 (Puelles and Rubenstein, | |||
| Ma | Lhx (Domínguez et al., | |||||||
| Nkx2.1 (Medina, | Nkx2.1 (Wolf and Ryu, 2013) | Nkx2.1 (Moreno and González, | Nkx2.1/2.2 (Domínguez et al., | Nkx2.1/2.2 (Moreno et al., | Nkx2.1 (García-Calero et al., | Nkx2.1 (Medina, | ||
| Otp (Wolf and Ryu, 2013) | Otp (Moreno and González, | Otp (Bardet et al., | Otp (Moreno et al., | Otp (Bardet et al., | Otp (Bardet et al., | |||
| Shh (Domínguez et al., | Shh (García-Calero et al., | Shh (Morales-Delgado et al., | ||||||
| -DIx (Martínez-de-la-Torre et al., | DIx (Domínguez et al., | -DIx (Puelles and Rubenstein, | ||||||
| Lhx1/5 (Osorio et al., | Lhx1 (Domínguez et al., | Lhx1 (Shimogori et al., |
Comparison of the different gene expression patterns detected in the different group of vertebrates.
Note that we only have indicated negative expressions to remark a difference between groups of vertebrates that is not due to the lack of data in the literature (empty squares).
Preoptohypothalamic boundary (POH)
The preoptic region (PO) was traditionally included within the hypothalamus until genoarchitectonic studies revealed that this region is derived from the FoxG1-positive telencephalic neuroephitelium (Tao and Lai, 1992; Murphy et al.,
Figure 2

Comparative aspects of the preoptic-hypothalamic (POH) boundary between amphibians and reptiles. Photomicrographs of transverse sections through the developing preoptic-hypothalamic territory of Xenopus(A–C) and Pseudemys(E–G) illustrating its molecular profile based on the combinatorial expression of different transcription factors and neuropeptides indicated in each photomicrograph. The developmental stage in the cases of Xenopus is also marked. (D) and (H) are summarizing schemes of lateral views of the brains in which the main molecular features of the POH are illustrated according to the color code indicated. In both schemes, a transverse section through the level indicated on the lateral view of the brain is illustrated. Note that the coordinate system for the hypothalamus rotates 90° because the longitudinal axis of the brain bends in the diencephalon, and this is also the case for all photomicrographs of sagittal sections in all figures. For abbreviations, see list. Scale bars = 50 μm (A,B), 100 μm (C,F,G), 200 μm (E).
Supraoptoparaventricular region (SPV)
The SPV is the most dorsal region in the alar hypothalamus and it is defined by the expression of Otp/Sim1 and the lack of Dlx/Shh/Nkx2.1 expression in all vertebrates analyzed (reviewed in Markakis,
Both in the amphibian Xenopus laevis and in the turtle Pseudemys scripta the extent of the SPV is particularly well defined by the expression of the transcription factor Otp, and its dorsal limit with the PO is defined by the lack of Isl1 expression (Figures 3A,G,I,N; Bardet et al.,
Figure 3

Comparative aspects of the supraoptoparaventricular (SPV) region between amphibians and reptiles. Photomicrographs of transverse (A,B,E,F,H’,I–M,O’) and sagittal (C,D,H,O) sections through the developing SPV territory of Xenopus(A–H’) and Pseudemys(I–O’) illustrating its molecular profile based on the combinatorial expression of different transcription factors and neuropeptides indicated in each figure. The developmental stage in the cases of Xenopus is also marked. (G) and (N) are summarizing schemes of lateral views of the brains in which the main molecular features of the SPV are illustrated according to the color code indicated. In both schemes, a transverse section through the level indicated on the lateral view of the brain is illustrated. Scale bars = 50 μm (A–F), 100 μm (H’), 200 μm (H,L,O,O’), 500 μm (I–K,M).
Interestingly, in some groups of fishes such as teleosts and lungfishes (the closest living relatives of tetrapods) the expression of Otp in the SPV territory has been reported (Del Giacco et al.,
Furthermore, both in Xenopus and Pseudemys the expression of the transcription factor Nkx2.2, allowed the rostro-caudal subdivision of the SPV into two different progenitor domains (Domínguez et al.,
The SPV of mammals and birds is also characterized by the expression of Pax6 and Tbr1 (Michaud et al.,
Of interest, some studies have recently described in amniotes a contingent of Otp positive cells generated in the SPV that migrate into the medial amygdala (Bardet et al.,
Regarding its neurochemical profile, the SPV of amphibians and reptiles contains different groups of cells secreting several neuropeptides such as vasotocine, mesotocine CRH, and TRH (Smeets et al., 1990; Propper et al.,
Suprachiasmatic region (SC)
The SC constitutes the ventral part of the alar hypothalamus and contains important neuroendocrine cell groups. This region is characterized by the expression of Dlx/Arx genes in all vertebrates analyzed (Bachy et al.,
Figure 4

Comparative aspects of the suprachiasmatic (SC) territory between amphibians and reptiles. Photomicrographs of transverse (C,F,I–K) and sagittal (A,B,D,E,H,M) sections through the developing SC territory of Xenopus(A–H) and Pseudemys(I–M) illustrating its molecular profile based on the combinatorial expression of different transcription factors and neuropeptides indicated in each figure. The developmental stage in the cases of Xenopus is also marked. (G) and (L) are summarizing schemes of lateral views of the brains in which the main molecular features of the SC region are illustrated according to the color code indicated. In both schemes, a transverse section through the level indicated on the lateral view of the brain is illustrated. Scale bars = 25 μm (D,H), 50 μm (B,C,E,F), 100 μm (A,K), 200 μm (I,J,M).
This region in mammals, identified as subparaventrcular area (Puelles et al.,
The acroterminal domain in front of the terminal region was proposed to be the source of the proper suprachiacmaitc nucleus (Puelles et al.,
In birds, Nkx2.1 is also expressed in the subparaventricular nucleus, that belongs to the suprachiasmatic domain, which also expresses Nkx2.2, Lhx6/7 and Lhx8 (Abellán and Medina,
Regarding the Nkx2.1 expression in the alar hypothalamus, it appears that is gradually restricted especially in the SC, from amphibians through amniotes (Figure 7). In mammals, the Lhx6 + intrahypothalamic diagonal band, proposed by Shimogori et al. (
Figure 5

Comparative aspects of the tuberal (Tub) territory between amphibians and reptiles. Photomicrographs of transverse (A–C,H–L) and sagittal (D,E,G,N) sections through the developing Tub territory of Xenopus(A–G) and Pseudemys(H–N) illustrating its molecular profile based on the combinatorial expression of different transcription factors and neuropeptides indicated in each figure. The developmental stage in the cases of Xenopus is also marked. (F) and (M) are summarizing schemes of lateral views of the brains in which the main molecular features of the Tub region are illustrated according to the color code indicated. In both schemes, a transverse section through the level indicated on the lateral view of the brain is illustrated. Scale bars = 100 μm (A–E,G,J–L,N), 200 μm (H), 500 μm (I).
Figure 6

Comparative aspects of the mammillary (M) territory between amphibians and reptiles. Photomicrographs of transverse (A–F,I,J,L,M,P) and sagittal (H,K,N,Q,Q’) sections through the developing tuberal territory of Xenopus(A–I) and Pseudemys(J–Q’) illustrating its molecular profile based on the combinatorial expression of different transcription factors and neuropeptides indicated in each figure. The developmental stage in the cases of Xenopus is also marked. (G) and (O) are summarizing schemes of lateral views of the brains in which the main molecular features of the M region are illustrated according to the color code indicated. In both schemes, a transverse section through the level indicated on the lateral view of the brain is illustrated. Scale bars = Scale bars: 100 μm (A–F,H,I,K’,M), 200 μm (L,N,P,Q,Q’), 500 μm (J,K).
Figure 7

Phylogenetic diagram representing the regionalization of the hypothalamus based on molecular criteria. Representative species of different vertebrate groups are considered, including an agnathan fish (lamprey), a teleost fish (zebrafish), a dipnoi (lunghfish), an anuran amphibian (Xenopus), a reptile (turtle), a bird (chicken), and a mammal (mouse). In all species, the hypothalamus includes comparable molecular compartments, and each compartment shows a tendency to a common organization regarding its molecular expression profile. However, there are some remarkable differences in the expression patterns during evolution, such as the lack of Pax6 expression in the SPV of lamprey, lunghfish and Xenopus; the SC in mammals virtually does not express Shh/Nkx2.1 that are expressed in non mammalian amniotes and in anamniotes; Otp is expressed in the mammillary region of all vertebrates analyzed (no data in the lamprey are available). However, most differences in the scheme are due to the absence of data in the literature. The numbers 1–4 in the scheme represent the main evolutionary events regarding to the hypothalamic organization, as follows: (1) Nkx2.1 expression restriction in SC. (2) POH Nkx2.2 expression. (3) Pax6 expression in SPV for the first time. (4) Pallial and thalamic expansion at the expense of the alar hypothalamic reduction. Note that the developmental stages used in the scheme are not equivalent for all species.
In functional terms, the SC region is known to belong to the neuroendocrine system and therefore consists of multiple neuropeptide-secreting cell populations. In mammals and birds, the SC is characterized by the presence of TRH positive cells, among others, that have also been reported in anamniotes such as anurans and fishes (Domínguez et al.,
Tuberal region (Tub)
This region is currently considered to extend in the dorsal part of the basal hypothalamus, and like the rest of the hypothalamus has been postulated that posses acroterminal, terminal, and peduncular portions (Figure 1; Puelles et al.,
However, in mammals the dorsal portion of the rostral terminal Tub is the only Otp expressing zone (Morales-Delgado et al.,
Distinctly, the caudal tuberal part (CT) of Xenopus and Pseudemys is characterized by the lack of Otp expression (Figures 5C,F,K–M) and, expression of Nkx2.2 (Figures 5C–F), a transcription factor typically located in basal territories and necessary to maintain the ventral phenotype (Briscoe and Ericson,
The boundary between the tuberal and mammillary territories in the basal hypothalamus of amphibians and reptiles is mainly defined by the lack of Isl1 expression in the mammillary region within the continuous Nkx2.1 positive tuberomammillar region (Figures 5F,G,M,N; Moreno et al.,
Compared to tetrapods, there are only a few data about the hypothalamic organization in fishes, mainly attending to expression patterns and development. Recent studies in lunghfishes have revealed that Nkx2.1 and Isl1 are expressed in the entire Tub, whereas Otp expression is restricted to the most rostral and dorsal part, sustaining similar subdivisions in the tuberal territory to the ones described in tetrapods, using the same markers (Moreno and González,
The chemoarchitecture and neuronal specification processes in the Tub seem to be largely conserved throughout vertebrate evolution. In Xenopus, in the Otp-positive rostral Tub a population of somatostatin expressing cells has been observed (Figures 5E,F; Domínguez et al.,
Finally, the anatomical position of the Dll4 expressing cell group located in the most caudal tuberal part of Xenopus is closely related to the GABAergic positive population (unpublished data), suggesting an implication of Dll4 in the specification of the GABAergic phenotype in the Tub, as occurs in the majority of the histogenetic domains where both markers colocalize (Price et al.,
Mammillary region (M)
In the current prosomeric model, the mammillary region is interpreted as formed by mammillary-terminal and retromammillary-peduncular regions (see Figure 1; Puelles et al.,
In recent years, the regionalization of the this area has been under analysis and the terminology used for its various subdivisions and their actual extent in the basal hypothalamic region have progressively varied with the appearance of the molecular approach (Shimogori et al.,
The mammillary area is also characterized by the expression of genes of the LIM-HD family, whose combinatorial expression pattern led to propose a new regionalization of this territory in mammals (Shimogori et al.,
Several studies in fishes have also reported the differential expression of LIM genes, such as Lhx6 and Lhx1/5, in the basal hypothalamic territory (Osorio et al.,
The lack of Shh expression in RMa has also been reported in the chicken, where the Shh becomes downregulated in the tuberomammillary primordium, but not in the RMa, at a specific point during development (Martí et al.,
Thus, regarding the situation in fishes, some studies have described the presence of Shh in the basal hypothalamus, although so far there are no data about the specific location of Shh expression within this basal hypothalamic territory. It has been reported the presence of two hedgehog genes, expressed in a Sonic Hh-like pattern, in the basal hypothalamus of lamprey (Osorio et al.,
In terms of chemical specification, the amphibian and reptilian mammillary region is characterized by the presence of a rich catecholaminergic cell population (Smeets et al., 1987; Smeets and González, 2000; Moreno et al.,
Regarding the nuclear specification, controversy exists regarding the origin of the different neuronal groups and several data support the contribution of diencephalic areas to the mammillary territory. In mammals, the retromammillary area was considered a caudoventral hypothalamic specification located between the diencephalic tegmentum (in P3; see for review Puelles et al.,
Concluding remarks
The organization of the brain undergoes evolutionary/adaptative changes during the anamnio-amniotic transition. The evolutionary leap from amphibians to reptiles involves relevant adaptation changes to conquer a new environment that have clear consequences on brain organization. However, it seems that during the transition from aquatic to terrestrial life the hypothalamus has maintained a major general pattern of organization, but with subtle differences that could be related to the new requirements for adaptation to the new environment. These variations in hypothalamic organization/regionalization highlighted in the present comparative genoarchitectonic analysis appear to have occurred gradually during the anamnio-amniotic transition starting with amphibians, which are the first tetrapods that arose, being anamniotes (Table 1; Figure 7). Considering the data gathered on the organization of the hypothalamus, it seems that there is a mostly common general pattern shared by all vertebrates that includes the following main features: (1) it belongs to the secondary prosencephalon and is topologically rostral to the diencephalon; and (2) it is formed by alar and basal regions that show genoarchitectonic patterns during development that are generally conserved across vertebrates, especially in the basal territories.
In the evolutionary context (Table 1; Figure 7), our results in amphibians and reptiles add information to the known features of the hypothalamic organization in birds and mammals and point out to some main features shared by all tetrapods: (1) each alar (SPV, SC) and basal (Tub, M) territory is also subdivided rostrocaudally into two different domains based on molecular criteria; (2) the expression of Nkx2.1 that characterizes the entire SC region in fishes starts to be restricted in amphibians and is gradually reduced through mammals where the SC virtually lacks expression of this transcription factor, what could be related to the gradual pallial and thalamic expansion that take place in the amniotes. In addition, there are some features in the organization of the hypothalamus that seem to have emerged with the amniotes (see Figure 7): (1) the existence of the preoptohypothalamic boundary observed in amniotes starts in reptiles; (2) also in reptiles, as in birds and mammals, Pax6 is expressed in the SPV, whereas such expression is not observed in anamniotes. These facts highlight the relevance of the studies involving species of amphibians and reptiles for elaborating a complete evolutionary story of the hypothalamus.
Comparative studies of the hypothalamus across vertebrates encompass many difficulties because the different degree of topographical modification of its parts, due to diverse forces during development that lead to the final different anatomy in each group (Figures 7, 8). The forces involved in the hypothalamic final conformation might be of different nature. If we consider the situation in mammals, in a “non-disturbed” neural tube at the level of the prosencephalon (Figure 8A) the alar hypothalamus is in the most rostral portion along with the telencephalic prospective territories, which will give rise to the telencephalic vesicles and the telencephalon impar during development. The neural tube suffers a second morphological strength given the flexure of the neural tube, which is maximum at the level of the diencephalic basal plate, thus at the boundary with the hypothalamic basal region. In addition, those rostral regions of the brain are under the direct morphological strength that produces the evagination of the telencephalic vesicles. Specially in mammals, the pallium is enormously expanded dramatically increasing in size and literally pushing the adjacent regions, like the alar hypothalamus. Therefore, in mammals due to the drastic expansion of the pallium, together with the strong flexure of the brain that bends the longitudinal axis almost 90°, the hypothalamus acquires a “ventral” position (Figure 8B). In the case of non-mammalian vertebrates, and specially in anamniotes, these developmental changes due to morphological pressures are, in general, less significant (Figure 8C). Telencephalic development is less massive and the cephalic flexure less pronounced, varying in the different vertebrates. However, in spite of the different topography of the hypothalamus, studies such as ours reveal that comparable subdivisions are contained in the hypothalamus of each group. Therefore, the main final conclusion of the comparative analysis of the region of the hypothalamus in vertebrates is probably the high degree of conservation of this region in evolution, as expected given its functional importance in the animal survival. Developmental forces during the ontogeny of each vertebrate group would be responsible for the different topographical arrangement of the hypothalamic regions, which otherwise are similarly specified by gene expression patterns throughout vertebrates.
Figure 8

Schematic comparison of the different forces during ontogeny that lead to the different hypothalamic anatomy. In this hypothetic scheme the situation between mammals and non-mammals (mainly based on our results in the development of the amphibian hypothalamus) are represented. Three main forces are supposed to act in a sequential manner and differently in each vertebrate group. The first force (1) to act is the flexure of the neural tube (A). In mammals, the longitunal axis bends almost 90° forming a sharp flexure and the rostral tube is moved to a “ventral” position (B), whereas in non-mammals this angle seems to be less pronounced (C). Then, a second morphological force acts over this longitudinal axis that is already partially bent, which is produced by the telencephalic evagination (2). In the case of mammals this second force acts equally on the caudal (hp1) and rostral (hp2) hypothalamic domains, so its main effect would be the flattening of the hypothalamic territory. However, in the case of non-mammals, the strength caused by the telencephalic evagination would be mainly pushing the rostral (hp2) hypothalamic domain, which helps to turn more “ventrally” the hypothalamus. Finally, a third force is the hypothalamic evagination (3). In mammals this third strength is contributing to the elongation of the hypothalamic territory and, in the case of non-mammals this force is also contributing to pronounced hypothalamic modification.
Statements
Author contributions
All authors had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. This review is based on previous studies in which the three authors were involved (Moreno et al.,
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitivity (MINECO, grant BFU2012-31687) and the UCM-B. Santander (grant GR3/14). Figures 2–6 contain modified images already used, and included here thanks to the Journal of Comparative Neurology policy that allows free use to authors in their own publications.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
- BH
basal hypothalamus
- CeA
central amygdala
- CPa
central portion of the paraventricular area
- CT
caudal tuberal region
- Dg
diagonal domain
- DPa
dorsal portion of the paraventricular area
- EPTh
prethalamic eminence
- hp1
hypothalamic prosomeric domain 1
- hp2
hypothalamic prosomeric domain 2
- Hyp
hypophysis
- M
mammillary region
- Ma
mammillary area proper
- MeA
medial amygdala
- oc
optic chiasm
- P1
prosomere 1
- P2
prosomere 2
- P3
prosomere 3
- P3b
basal plate of P3
- Pa
paraventricular nucleus
- Pal
pallidum
- PM
perimammillary area
- PO
preoptic region
- POC
preoptocommissural area
- POH
preoptohypothalamic boundary
- PPa
peduncular domain of Pa
- PSPa
peduncular domain of SPa
- PT
pretectum
- PTh
prethalamus
- PR
perimammillary area
- PRM
periretromammillary area
- RM
retromammillary area
- RMa
retromammillary region
- RT
rostral tuberal region
- RTu
retrotuberal region (peduncular)
- RtuD
retrotuberal dorsal domain
- RTul
retrotuberal lateral domain
- RTuV
retrotuberal ventral domain
- SC
suprachiasmatic region
- SCc
caudal suprachiasmatic region
- SCr
rostral suprachiasmatic region
- Spa
subparaventricular area
- SP
subpallium
- SPV
supraoptoparaventricular region
- SPVc
caudal supraoptoparaventricular region
- SPVr
rostral supraoptoparaventricular region
- Str
striatum
- VPa
ventral portion of the paraventricular area
- Th
thalamus
- TPa
terminal domain of Pa
- TPaC
central portion of TPa
- TPaD
dorsal portion of TPa
- TPaV
ventral portion of TPa
- TSPa
terminal domain of SPa
- Tu
tuberal region (terminal)
- TuD
dorsal tuberal domain
- Tul
lateral tuberal domain
- TuV
ventral tuberal domain
- Tub
tuberal region.
Abbreviations
References
1
AbellánA.MedinaL. (2009). Subdivisions and derivatives of the chicken subpallium based on expression of LIM and other regulatory genes and markers of neuron subpopulations during development. J. Comp. Neurol.515, 465–501. 10.1002/cne.22083
2
AbellánA.VernierB.RétauxS.MedinaL. (2010). Similarities and differences in the forebrain expression of Lhx1 and Lhx5 between chicken and mouse: insights for understanding telencephalic development and evolution. J. Comp. Neurol.518, 3512–3528. 10.1002/cne.22410
3
AcamporaD.PostiglioneM. P.AvantaggiatoV.Di BonitoM.VaccarinoF. M.MichaudJ.et al. (1999). Progressive impairment of developing neuroendocrine cell lineages in the hypothalamus of mice lacking the Orthopedia gene. Genes Dev.13, 2787–2800. 10.1101/gad.13.21.2787
4
AlunniA.BlinM.DeschetK.BourratF.VernierP.RétauxS. (2004). Cloning and developmental expression patterns of Dlx2, Lhx7 and Lhx9 in the medaka fish (Oryzias latipes). Mech. Dev.121, 977–983. 10.1016/j.mod.2004.03.023
5
BachyI.BerthonJ.RétauxS. (2002). Defining pallial and subpallial divisions in the developing Xenopus forebrain. Mech. Dev.117, 163–172. 10.1016/s0925-4773(02)00199-5
6
BandínS.MoronaR.MorenoN.GonzálezA. (2013). Regional expression of Pax7 in the brain of Xenopus laevis during embryonic and larval development. Front. Neuroanat.7:48. 10.3389/fnana.2013.00048
7
BardetS. M.CobosI.PuellesE.Martínez-De-La-TorreM.PuellesL. (2006). Chicken lateral septal organ and other circumventricular organs form in a striatal subdomain abutting the molecular striatopallidal border. J. Comp. Neurol.499, 745–767. 10.1002/cne.21121
8
BardetS. M.FerránJ. L.Sánchez-ArronesL.PuellesL. (2010). Ontogenetic expression of sonic hedgehog in the chicken subpallium. Front. Neuroanat.4:28. 10.3389/fnana.2010.00028
9
BardetS. M.Martínez-de-la-TorreM.NorthcuttR. G.RubensteinJ. L.PuellesL. (2008). Conserved pattern of OTP-positive cells in the paraventricular nucleus and other hypothalamic sites of tetrapods. Brain Res. Bull.75, 231–235. 10.1016/j.brainresbull.2007.10.037
10
BlechmanJ.BorodovskyN.EisenbergM.Nabel-RosenH.GrimmJ.LevkowitzG. (2007). Specification of hypothalamic neurons by dual regulation of the homeodomain protein Orthopedia. Development134, 4417–4426. 10.1242/dev.011262
11
BourguignonC.LiJ.PapalopuluN. (1998). XBF-1, a winged helix transcription factor with dual activity, has a role in positioning neurogenesis in Xenopus competent ectoderm. Development125, 4889–4900.
12
BriscoeJ.EricsonJ. (1999). The specification of neuronal identity by graded Sonic Hedgehog signalling. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol.10, 353–362. 10.1006/scdb.1999.0295
13
BroxA.PuellesL.FerreiroB.MedinaL. (2003). Expression of the genes GAD67 and Distal-less-4 in the forebrain of Xenopus laevis confirms a common pattern in tetrapods. J. Comp. Neurol.461, 370–393. 10.1002/cne.10688
14
BruceL. (2008). “Evolution of the hypothalamus in amniotes. Evolution and Embryological development of forebrain,” in Encyclopedia of Neuroscience, eds BinderM. D.HirokawaN.WindhorstU. (Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag), 1363–1367.
15
BruceL. L.NearyT. J. (1995). The limbic system of tetrapods: a comparative analysis of cortical and amygdalar populations. Brain Behav. Evol.46, 224–234. 10.1159/000113276
16
BulfoneA.PuellesL.PorteusM. H.FrohmanM. A.MartinG. R.RubensteinJ. L. (1993). Spatially restricted expression of Dlx-1, Dlx-2 (Tes-1), Gbx-2 and Wnt-3 in the embryonic day 12.5 mouse forebrain defines potential transverse and longitudinal segmental boundaries. J. Neurosci.13, 3155–3172.
17
BupeshM.AbellánA.MedinaL. (2011b). Genetic and experimental evidence supports the continuum of the central extended amygdala and a mutiple embryonic origin of its principal neurons. J. Comp. Neurol.519, 3507–3531. 10.1002/cne.22719
18
BupeshM.LegázI.AbellánA.MedinaL. (2011a). Multiple telencephalic and extratelencephalic embryonic domains contribute neurons to the medial extended amygdala. J. Comp. Neurol.519, 1505–1525. 10.1002/cne.22581
19
ButlerA.HodosW. (2005). “The visceral brain: the hypothalamus and autonomic nervous system,” in Comparative Vertebrate Neuroanatomy: Evolution and Adaptation, ed SonsJ. W. (New Jersey: Wiley), 445–467.
20
CaqueretA.CoumailleauP.MichaudJ. L. (2006). Regionalization of the anterior hypothalamus in the chick embryo. Dev. Dyn.233, 652–658. 10.1002/dvdy.20372
21
CrossleyP. H.MartínezS.OhkuboY.RubensteinJ. L. (2001). Coordinate expression of Fgf8, Otx2, Bmp4 and Shh in the rostral prosencephalon during development of the telencephalic and optic vesicles. Neuroscience108, 183–206. 10.1016/s0306-4522(01)00411-0
22
D’AnielloB.PinelliC.JadhaoA. G.RastogiR. K.MeyerD. L. (1999). Comparative analysis of FMRFamide-like immunoreactivity in caiman (Caiman crocodilus) and turtle (Trachemys scripta elegans) brains. Cell Tissue Res.298, 549–559. 10.1007/s004410050077
23
DavisA. M.SeneyM. L.StallingsN. R.ZhaoL.ParkerK. L.TobetS. A. (2004). Loss of steroidogenic factor 1 alters cellular topography in the mouse ventromedial nucleus of the hypothalamus. J. Neurobiol.60, 424–436. 10.1002/neu.20030
24
Del GiaccoL.PistocchiA.CotelliF.FortunatoA. E.SordinoP. (2008). A peek inside the neurosecretory brain through Orthopedia lenses. Dev. Dyn.237, 2295–2303. 10.1002/dvdy.21668
25
Del GiaccoL.SordinoP.PistocchiA.AndreakisN.TaralloR.Di BenedettoB.et al. (2006). Differential regulation of the zebrafish orthopedia 1 gene during fate determination of diencephalic neurons. BMC Dev. Biol.6:50. 10.1186/1471-213X-6-50
26
Diez-RouxG.BanfiS.SultanM.GeffersL.AnandS.RozadoD.et al. (2011). A high-resolution anatomical atlas of the transcriptome in the mouse embryo. PLoS Biol.9:e1000582. 10.1371/journal.pbio.1000582
27
DomínguezL.GonzálezA.MorenoN. (2010). Sonic hedgehog expression during Xenopus laevisforebrain development. Brain Res.1347, 19–32. 10.1016/j.brainres.2010.06.007
28
DomínguezL.GonzálezA.MorenoN. (2011). Ontogenetic distribution of the transcription factor nkx2.2 in the developing forebrain of Xenopus laevis. Front. Neuroanat.5:11. 10.3389/fnana.2011.00011
29
DomínguezL.GonzálezA.MorenoN. (2014). Characterization of the hypothalamus of Xenopus laevis during development. II. The basal regions. J. Comp. Neurol.522, 1102–1131. 10.1002/cne.23471
30
DomínguezL.LópezJ. M.GonzálezA. (2008). Distribution of thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) immunoreactivity in the brain of urodele amphibians. Brain Behav. Evol.71, 231–246. 10.1159/000122835
31
DomínguezL.MoronaR.GonzálezA.MorenoN. (2013). Characterization of the hypothalamus of Xenopus laevis during development. I. The alar regions. J. Comp. Neurol.521, 725–759. 10.1002/cne.23222
32
EatonJ. L.GlasgowE. (2007). Zebrafish orthopedia (otp) is required for isotocin cell development. Dev. Genes Evol.217, 149–158. 10.1007/s00427-006-0123-2
33
EatonJ. L.HolmqvistB.GlasgowE. (2008). Ontogeny of vasotocin-expressing cells in zebrafish: selective requirement for the transcriptional regulators orthopedia and single-minded 1 in the preoptic area. Dev. Dyn.237, 995–1005. 10.1002/dvdy.21503
34
FigdorM. C.SternC. D. (1993). Segmental organization of embryonic diencephalon. Nature363, 630–634. 10.1038/363630a0
35
FlamesN.PlaR.GelmanD. M.RubensteinJ. L.PuellesL.MarínO. (2007). Delineation of multiple subpallial progenitor domains by the combinatorial expression of transcriptional codes. J. Neurosci.27, 9682–9695. 10.1523/jneurosci.2750-07.2007
36
García-CaleroE.Fernández-GarreP.MartínezS.PuellesL. (2008). Early mammillary pouch specification in the course of prechordal ventralization of the forebrain tegmentum. Dev. Biol.320, 366–377. 10.1016/j.ydbio.2008.05.545
37
Garcia-LopezR.PomberoA.MartinezS. (2009). Fate map of the chick embryo neural tube. Dev. Growth Differ.51, 145–165. 10.1111/j.1440-169x.2009.01096.x
38
Garcia-LopezR.VieiraC.EchevarriaD.MartinezS. (2004). Fate map of the diencephalon and the zona limitans at the 10-somites stage in chick embryos. Dev. Biol.268, 514–530. 10.1016/j.ydbio.2003.12.038
39
García-MorenoF.PedrazaM.Di GiovannantonioL. G.Di SalvioM.López-MascaraqueL.SimeoneA.et al. (2010). A neuronal migratory pathway crossing from diencephalon to telencephalon populates amygdala nuclei. Nat. Neurosci.13, 680–689. 10.1038/nn.2556
40
GonzálezA.NorthcuttR. G. (2009). An immunohistochemical approach to lungfish telencephalic organization. Brain Behav. Evol.74, 43–55. 10.1159/000229012
41
GonzálezA.SmeetsW. J. (1991). Comparative analysis of dopamine and tyrosine hydroxylase immunoreactivities in the brain of two amphibians, the anuran Rana ridibunda and the urodele Pleurodeles waltlii. J. Comp. Neurol.303, 457–477. 10.1002/cne.903030311
42
GonzálezA.TuinhofR.SmeetsW. J. (1993). Distribution of tyrosine hydroxylase and dopamine immunoreactivities in the brain of the South African clawed frog Xenopus laevis. Anat. Embryol. (Berl)187, 193–201. 10.1007/bf00171750
43
GoshuE.JinH.LovejoyJ.MarionJ. F.MichaudJ. L.FanC. M. (2004). Sim2 contributes to neuroendocrine hormone gene expression in the anterior hypothalamus. Mol. Endocrinol.18, 1251–1262. 10.1210/me.2003-0372
44
HergetU.WolfA.WullimannM. F.RyuS. (2014). Molecular neuroanatomy and chemoarchitecture of the neurosecretory preoptic-hypothalamic area in zebrafish larvae. J. Comp. Neurol.522, 1542–1564. 10.1002/cne.23480
45
HerrickC. (1910). The morphology of the forebrain in Amphibian and Reptilia. J. Comp. Neurol.20, 413–547. 10.1002/cne.920200502
46
HerrickC. (1948). The Brain of the Tiger Salamander, Ambystina Tigrinum.Chicago: The University of Chigaco Press.
47
HisW. (1893a). Über das frontale Ende des Gehirnrohrs. Arch Anat Entwickelungsges. Anatomische Abteilung des Arch f.Anat u. Physiol3, 157–171.
48
HisW. (1893b). Vorschläge zur Eintheilung des Gehirns. Arch Anat Entwickelungsges. Anatomische Abteilung des Arch f.Anat u. Physiol3, 172–179.
49
HodosW. (2008). “Evolution of the hypothalamus in amniotes,” in Encyclopedia of Neuroscience, eds BinderM. D.HirokawaN.WindhorstU. (Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag), 1361–1363.
50
HökfeltT.FuxeK.JohanssonO.JeffcoateS.WhiteN. (1975). Distribution of thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) in the central nervous system as revealed with immunohistochemistry. Eur. J. Pharmacol.34, 389–392. 10.1016/0014-2999(75)90269-1
51
HökfeltT.MartenssonR.BjörklundA.KleinauS.GoldsteinM. (1984). “Distributional maps of tirosine hydroxilase immunoreactive neurons in the rat brain,” in Classical Transmitters in the CNS. I. Handbook of Chemical Neuroanatomy, eds BjörklundA.HökfeltT. (Amsterdam: Elsevier), 277–386.
52
Horjales-AraujoE.HellysazA.BrobergerC. (2014). Lateral hypothalamic thyrotropin-releasing hormone neurons: distribution and relationship to histochemically defined cell populations in the rat. Neuroscience277, 87–102. 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2014.06.043
53
KanoS.XiaoJ. H.OsórioJ.EkkerM.HadzhievY.MüllerF.et al. (2010). Two lamprey Hedgehog genes share non-coding regulatory sequences and expression patterns with gnathostome Hedgehogs. PLoS One5:e13332. 10.1371/journal.pone.0013332
54
KawanoH.HorieM.HonmaS.KawamuraK.TakeuchiK.KimuraS. (2003). Aberrant trajectory of ascending dopaminergic pathway in mice lacking Nkx2.1. Exp. Neurol.182, 103–112. 10.1016/s0014-4886(03)00030-x
55
KimuraS.HaraY.PineauT.Fernandez-SalgueroP.FoxC. H.WardJ. M.et al. (1996). The T/ebp null mouse: thyroid-specific enhancer-binding protein is essential for the organogenesis of the thyroid, lung, ventral forebrain and pituitary. Genes Dev.10, 60–69. 10.1101/gad.10.1.60
56
KuhlenbeckH. (1973). The Central Nervous System of Vertebrates (Overall Morphologic Pattern, Vol. 3, Part II).Basel: Karger.
57
KurraschD. M.CheungC. C.LeeF. Y.TranP. V.HataK.IngrahamH. A. (2007). The neonatal ventromedial hypothalamus transcriptome reveals novel markers with spatially distinct patterning. J. Neurosci.27, 13624–13634. 10.1523/jneurosci.2858-07.2007
58
LechanR. M.WuP.JacksonI. M. (1986). Immunolocalization of the thyrotropin-releasing hormone prohormone in the rat central nervous system. Endocrinology119, 1210–1216. 10.1210/endo-119-3-1210
59
LöhrH.RyuS.DrieverW. (2009). Zebrafish diencephalic A11-related dopaminergic neurons share a conserved transcriptional network with neuroendocrine cell lineages. Development136, 1007–1017. 10.1242/dev.033878
60
LópezJ. M.DomínguezL.GonzálezA. (2008). Immunohistochemical localization of thyrotropin-releasing hormone in the brain of reptiles. J. Chem. Neuroanat.36, 251–263. 10.1016/j.jchemneu.2008.06.006
61
MachlufY.GutnickA.LevkowitzG. (2011). Development of the zebrafish hypothalamus. Ann. N Y Acad. Sci.1220, 93–105. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05945.x
62
ManningL.OhyamaK.SaegerB.HatanoO.WilsonS. A.LoganM.et al. (2006). Regional morphogenesis in the hypothalamus: a BMP-Tbx2 pathway coordinates fate and proliferation through Shh downregulation. Dev. Cell11, 873–885. 10.1016/j.devcel.2006.09.021
63
MarínO.RubensteinJ. L. (2001). A long, remarkable journey: tangential migration in the telencephalon. Nat. Rev. Neurosci.2, 780–790. 10.1038/35097509
64
MarkakisE. A. (2002). Development of the neuroendocrine hypothalamus. Front. Neuroendocrinol.23, 257–291. 10.1016/s0091-3022(02)00003-1
65
MartíE.TakadaR.BumcrotD. A.SasakiH.McMahonA. P. (1995). Distribution of Sonic hedgehog peptides in the developing chick and mouse embryo. Development121, 2537–2547.
66
Martínez-de-la-TorreM.PombalM. A.PuellesL. (2011). Distal-less-like protein distribution in the larval lamprey forebrain. Neuroscience178, 270–284. 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2010.12.030
67
MedinaL. (2008). “Evolution and embryological development of forebrain,” in Encyclopedia of Neuroscience, eds BinderM. D.HirokawaN.WindhorstU. (Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag), 1172–1192.
68
MedinaL.BupeshM.AbellánA. (2011). Contribution of genoarchitecture to understanding forebrain evolution and development, with particular emphasis on the amygdala. Brain Behav. Evol.78, 216–236. 10.1159/000330056
69
MenuetA.AlunniA.JolyJ. S.JefferyW. R.RétauxS. (2007). Expanded expression of Sonic Hedgehog in Astyanax cavefish: multiple consequences on forebrain development and evolution. Development134, 845–855. 10.1242/dev.02780
70
MerchenthalerI.CsernusV.CsontosC.PetruszP.MessB. (1988). New data on the immunocytochemical localization of thyrotropin-releasing hormone in the rat central nervous system. Am. J. Anat.181, 359–376. 10.1002/aja.1001810404
71
MichaudJ. L.DeRossiC.MayN. R.HoldenerB. C.FanC. M. (2000). ARNT2 acts as the dimerization partner of SIM1 for the development of the hypothalamus. Mech. Dev.90, 253–261. 10.1016/s0925-4773(99)00328-7
72
MichaudJ. L.RosenquistT.MayN. R.FanC. M. (1998). Development of neuroendocrine lineages requires the bHLH-PAS transcription factor SIM1. Genes Dev.12, 3264–3275. 10.1101/gad.12.20.3264
73
Morales-DelgadoN.Castro-RoblesB.FerránJ. L.Martínez-de-la-TorreM.PuellesL.DíazC. (2014). Regionalized differentiation of CRH, TRH and GHRH peptidergic neurons in the mouse hypothalamus. Brain Struct. Funct.219, 1083–1111. 10.1007/s00429-013-0554-2
74
Morales-DelgadoN.MerchánP.BardetS. M.FerránJ. L.PuellesL.DiazC. (2011). Topography of Somatostatin gene expression relative to molecular progenitor domains during ontogeny of the mouse hypothalamus. Front. Neuroanat.5:10. 10.3389/fnana.2011.00010
75
MorenoN.BachyI.RétauxS.GonzálezA. (2004). LIM-homeodomain genes as developmental and adult genetic markers of Xenopus forebrain functional subdivisions. J. Comp. Neurol.472, 52–72. 10.1002/cne.20046
76
MorenoN.DomínguezL.MoronaR.GonzálezA. (2012). Subdivisions of the turtle Pseudemys scripta hypothalamus based on the expression of regulatory genes and neuronal markers. J. Comp. Neurol.520, 453–478. 10.1002/cne.22762
77
MorenoN.DomínguezL.RétauxS.GonzálezA. (2008b). Islet1 as a marker of subdivisions and cell types in the developing forebrain of Xenopus. Neuroscience154, 1423–1439. 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2008.04.029
78
MorenoN.GonzálezA. (2011). The non-evaginated secondary prosencephalon of vertebrates. Front. Neuroanat.5:12. 10.3389/fnana.2011.00012
79
MorenoN.MoronaR.LópezJ. M.GonzálezA. (2010). Subdivisions of the turtle Pseudemys scripta subpallium based on the expression of regulatory genes and neuronal markers. J. Comp. Neurol.518, 4877–4902. 10.1002/cne.22493
80
MorenoN.RétauxS.GonzálezA. (2008a). Spatio-temporal expression of Pax6 in Xenopus forebrain. Brain Res.1239, 92–99. 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.08.052
81
MoronaR.GonzálezA. (2008). Calbindin-D28k and calretinin expression in the forebrain of anuran and urodele amphibians: further support for newly identified subdivisions. J. Comp. Neurol.511, 187–220. 10.1002/cne.21832
82
MurakamiY.OgasawaraM.SugaharaF.HiranoS.SatohN.KurataniS. (2001). Identification and expression of the lamprey Pax6 gene: evolutionary origin of the segmented brain of vertebrates. Development128, 3521–3531.
83
MurphyD. B.WieseS.BurfeindP.SchmundtD.MatteiM. G.Schulz-SchaefferW.et al. (1994). Human brain factor 1, a new member of the fork head gene family. Genomics21, 551–557. 10.1006/geno.1994.1313
84
NieuwenhuysR.VoogdJ.van HuijzenC. (2008). The Human Central Nervous System.Germany: Springer.
85
NorthcuttR. G. (1970). The Telencephalon of the Western Painted Turtle (Chrysemys Picta Bellis).Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
86
OhyamaK.EllisP.KimuraS.PlaczekM. (2005). Directed differentiation of neural cells to hypothalamic dopaminergic neurons. Development132, 5185–5197. 10.1242/dev.02094
87
OsorioJ.MazanS.RétauxS. (2005). Organisation of the lamprey ( Lampetra fluviatilis) embryonic brain: insights from LIM-homeodomain, Pax and hedgehog genes. Dev. Biol.288, 100–112. 10.1016/j.ydbio.2005.08.042
88
PattenI.KulesaP.ShenM. M.FraserS.PlaczekM. (2003). Distinct modes of floor plate induction in the chick embryo. Development130, 4809–4821. 10.1242/dev.00694
89
PriceM.LemaistreM.PischetolaM.Di LauroR.DubouleD. (1991). A mouse gene related to Distal-less shows a restricted expression in the developing forebrain. Nature351, 748–751. 10.1038/351748a0
90
PropperC. R.JonesR. E.LopezK. H. (1992). Distribution of arginine vasotocin in the brain of the lizard Anolis carolinensis. Cell Tissue Res.267, 391–398. 10.1007/bf00302978
91
PuellesL. (1995). A segmental morphological paradigm for understanding vertebrate forebrains. Brain Behav. Evol.46, 319–337. 10.1159/000316271
92
PuellesL. (2001). Brain segmentation and forebrain development in amniotes. Brain Res. Bull.55, 695–710. 10.1016/s0361-9230(01)00588-3
93
PuellesL.KuwanaE.PuellesE.BulfoneA.ShimamuraK.KeleherJ.et al. (2000). Pallial and subpallial derivatives in the embryonic chick and mouse telencephalon, traced by the expression of the genes Dlx-2, Emx-1, Nkx-2.1, Pax-6 and Tbr-1. J. Comp. Neurol.424, 409–438. 10.1002/1096-9861(20000828)424:3<409::aid-cne3>3.0.co;2-7
94
PuellesL.MartínezS.Martínez-de-la-TorreM.RubensteinJ. L. (2004). “Gene maps and related histogenetic domains in the forebrain and midbrain,” in The Rat Nervous System, ed PaxinosG.3rd Edn. (San Diego: Elsevier), 3–125.
95
PuellesL.Martínez de la TorreM.BardetS.RubensteinJ. L. (2012a). “Hypothalamus,” in The Mouse Nervous System, eds WatsonC.PaxinosG.PuellesL. (London: Academic press. Elsevier), 221–313.
96
PuellesL.Martínez de la TorreM.FerránJ. L.WatsonC. (2012b). “Diencephalon,” in The Mouse Nervous System, eds WatsonC.PaxinosG.PuellesL. (London: Academic press. Elsevier), 313–337.
97
PuellesL.RubensteinJ. L. (1993). Expression patterns of homeobox and other putative regulatory genes in the embryonic mouse forebrain suggest a neuromeric organization. Trends Neurosci.16, 472–479. 10.1016/0166-2236(93)90080-6
98
PuellesL.RubensteinJ. L. (2003). Forebrain gene expression domains and the evolving prosomeric model. Trends Neurosci.26, 469–476. 10.1016/s0166-2236(03)00234-0
99
RohrK. B.BarthK. A.VargaZ. M.WilsonS. W. (2001). The nodal pathway acts upstream of hedgehog signaling to specify ventral telencephalic identity. Neuron29, 341–351. 10.1016/s0896-6273(01)00210-0
100
RothM.BonevB.LindsayJ.LeaR.PanagiotakiN.HouartC.et al. (2010). FoxG1 and TLE2 act cooperatively to regulate ventral telencephalon formation. Development137, 1553–1562. 10.1242/dev.044909
101
RubensteinJ. L.MartínezS.ShimamuraK.PuellesL. (1994). The embryonic vertebrate forebrain: the prosomeric model. Science266, 578–580. 10.1126/science.7939711
102
RyuS.MahlerJ.AcamporaD.HolzschuhJ.ErhardtS.OmodeiD.et al. (2007). Orthopedia homeodomain protein is essential for diencephalic dopaminergic neuron development. Curr. Biol.17, 873–880. 10.1016/j.cub.2007.04.003
103
Sánchez-ArronesL.FerránJ. L.Rodríguez-GallardoL.PuellesL. (2009). Incipient forebrain boundaries traced by differential gene expression and fate mapping in the chick neural plate. Dev. Biol.335, 43–65. 10.1016/j.ydbio.2009.08.012
104
SanderM.PaydarS.EricsonJ.BriscoeJ.BerberE.GermanM.et al. (2000). Ventral neural patterning by Nkx homeobox genes: Nkx6.1 controls somatic motor neuron and ventral interneuron fates. Genes Dev.14, 2134–2139. 10.1101/gad.820400
105
ShimamuraK.HartiganD. J.MartínezS.PuellesL.RubensteinJ. L. (1995). Longitudinal organization of the anterior neural plate and neural tube. Development121, 3923–3933.
106
ShimogoriT.LeeD. A.Miranda-AnguloA.YangY.WangH.JiangL.et al. (2010). A genomic atlas of mouse hypothalamic development. Nat. Neurosci.13, 767–775. 10.1038/nn.2545
107
SmeetsW. J.GonzálezA. (2000). Catecholamine systems in the brain of vertebrates: new perspectives through a comparative approach. Brain Res. Brain Res. Rev.33, 308–379. 10.1016/s0165-0173(00)00034-5
108
SmeetsW. J.JonkerA. J.HooglandP. V. (1987). Distribution of dopamine in the forebrain and midbrain of the red-eared turtle, Pseudemys scripta elegans, reinvestigated using antibodies against dopamine. Brain Behav. Evol.30, 121–142. 10.1159/000118642
109
SmeetsW. J.SevensmaJ. J.JonkerA. J. (1990). Comparative analysis of vasotocin-like immunoreactivity in the brain of the turtle Pseudemys scripta elegans and the snake Python regius. Brain Behav. Evol.35, 65–84. 10.1159/000115857
110
StoykovaA.GrussP. (1994). Roles of Pax-genes in developing and adult brain as suggested by expression patterns. J. Neurosci.14, 1395–1412.
111
StriedterG. F. (1997). The telencephalon of tetrapods in evolution. Brain Behav. Evol.49, 179–213. 10.1159/000105936
112
TaoW.LaiE. (1992). Telencephalon-restricted expression of BF-1, a new member of the HNF-3/fork head gene family, in the developing rat brain. Neuron8, 957–966. 10.1016/0896-6273(92)90210-5
113
ten DonkelaarH. J. (1998a). “Anurans,” in The Central Nervous System of Vertebrates, eds NieuwenhuysR.ten DonkelaarH. J.NicholsonC. (London: Springer), 1151–1314.
114
ten DonkelaarH. J. (1998b). “Reptiles,” in The Central Nervous System of Vertebrates, ed NieuwenhuysR. (London: Springer), 1315–1524.
115
Tessmar-RaibleK.RaibleF.ChristodoulouF.GuyK.RemboldM.HausenH.et al. (2007). Conserved sensory-neurosecretory cell types in annelid and fish forebrain: insights into hypothalamus evolution. Cell129, 1389–1400. 10.1016/j.cell.2007.04.041
116
ToressonH.PotterS. S.CampbellK. (2000). Genetic control of dorsal-ventral identity in the telencephalon: opposing roles for Pax6 and Gsh2. Development127, 4361–4371.
117
TsuruoY.HökfeltT.VisserT. (1987). Thyrotropin releasing hormone (TRH)-immunoreactive cell groups in the rat central nervous system. Exp. Brain Res.68, 213–217. 10.1007/bf00255248
118
van den AkkerW. M.BroxA.PuellesL.DurstonA. J.MedinaL. (2008). Comparative functional analysis provides evidence for a crucial role for the homeobox gene Nkx2.1/Titf-1 in forebrain evolution. J. Comp. Neurol.506, 211–223. 10.1002/cne.21542
119
WangW.LufkinT. (2000). The murine Otp homeobox gene plays an essential role in the specification of neuronal cell lineages in the developing hypothalamus. Dev. Biol.227, 432–449. 10.1006/dbio.2000.9902
120
WolfA.RyuS. (2013). Specification of posterior hypothalamic neurons requires coordinated activities of Fezf2, Otp, Sim1a and Foxb1.2. Development140, 1762–1773. 10.1242/dev.085357
121
YeeC. L.WangY.AndersonS.EkkerM.RubensteinJ. L. (2009). Arcuate nucleus expression of NKX2.1 and DLX and lineages expressing these transcription factors in neuropeptide Y(+), proopiomelanocortin(+) and tyrosine hydroxylase(+) neurons in neonatal and adult mice. J. Comp. Neurol.517, 37–50. 10.1002/cne.22132
122
ZardoyaR.MeyerA. (2001a). The evolutionary position of turtles revised. Naturwissenschaften88, 193–200. 10.1007/s001140100228
123
ZardoyaR.MeyerA. (2001b). On the origin of and phylogenetic relationships among living amphibians. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U S A98, 7380–7383. 10.1073/pnas.111455498
124
ZhaoX. F.SuhC. S.PratC. R.EllingsenS.FjoseA. (2009). Distinct expression of two foxg1 paralogues in zebrafish. Gene Expr. Patterns9, 266–272. 10.1016/j.gep.2009.04.001
Summary
Keywords
hypothalamus, prosencephalon, forebrain patterning, development, evolution
Citation
Domínguez L, González A and Moreno N (2015) Patterns of hypothalamic regionalization in amphibians and reptiles: common traits revealed by a genoarchitectonic approach. Front. Neuroanat. 9:3. doi: 10.3389/fnana.2015.00003
Received
01 October 2014
Accepted
09 January 2015
Published
03 February 2015
Volume
9 - 2015
Edited by
Luis Puelles, Universidad de Murcia, Spain
Reviewed by
Nobuaki Tamamaki, Kumamoto University, Japan; Luis Puelles, Universidad de Murcia, Spain; Alino Martinez-Marcos, Universidad de Castilla, Spain
Copyright
© 2015 Domínguez, González and Moreno.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution and reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Nerea Moreno, Faculty of Biology, Department of Cell Biology, University Complutense of Madrid, Av. José Antonio Novais 2, Madrid E-28040, Spain e-mail: nerea@bio.ucm.es
This article was submitted to the journal Frontiers in Neuroanatomy.
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.