Trends in Genetics
Volume 31, Issue 2, February 2015, Pages 88-96
Journal home page for Trends in Genetics

Review
Is pigment patterning in fish skin determined by the Turing mechanism?

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2014.11.005Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Pigment patterns of zebrafish exhibit the specific dynamic characteristics of a Turing pattern.

  • Pigmentation patterns arise from the interactions among two/three types of pigment cell.

  • Tuning of cell–cell interactions changes the pattern from stripes to a variety of other patterns.

  • The identified mechanism satisfies the necessary conditions of Turing pattern formation.

More than half a century ago, Alan Turing postulated that pigment patterns may arise from a mechanism that could be mathematically modeled based on the diffusion of two substances that interact with each other. Over the past 15 years, the molecular and genetic tools to verify this prediction have become available. Here, we review experimental studies aimed at identifying the mechanism underlying pigment pattern formation in zebrafish. Extensive molecular genetic studies in this model organism have revealed the interactions between the pigment cells that are responsible for the patterns. The mechanism discovered is substantially different from that predicted by the mathematical model, but it retains the property of ‘local activation and long-range inhibition’, a necessary condition for Turing pattern formation. Although some of the molecular details of pattern formation remain to be elucidated, current evidence confirms that the underlying mechanism is mathematically equivalent to the Turing mechanism.

Section snippets

How do skin patterns form?

The beauty and variety of animal pigmentation patterns have an attraction not only for the public, but also for developmental biologists interested in understanding the formation of such patterns 1, 2. Two characteristics have piqued the curiosity of developmental biologists about the underlying mechanism of pattern formation. The first is the variation in patterns among closely related species. For example, one can see by going to an aquarium that pigment patterns of fish vary extensively

Zebrafish as a model organism to study pigment patterning

Among the many animal species that have skin patterns, the zebrafish is the only model organism for which a variety of techniques for genetic manipulation 20, 21 and a library of mutant lines 22, 23, 24 are both available. As a result of these obvious advantages, studies involving zebrafish have been the leading source for information about patterning in skin pigmentation [25]. These studies have also produced several mutants, and have uncovered the involvement of numerous genes in the

Involvement of pigment cells in pattern formation

When one of the pigment cell types that constitute the pattern of stripes in zebrafish is lost due to a mutation, the entire pattern is lost, suggesting that the pattern is induced by the mutual interaction between the pigment cells. In zebrafish mutants lacking melanophores (Figure 2, nac) [42] or xanthophores (Figure 2, pfe) [43], no distinct patterns form in the body or in the fins. In zebrafish lacking iridophores, the pattern of stripes in the body is lost, but the stripes in the fins are

Interactions between pigment cells

To illuminate the patterning mechanism, the exact nature of the actual interactions between the pigment cells first needs to be elucidated. Given that the interactions between melanophores and xanthophores can drive pattern formation, at least in the fins, we focus first on these cells. The contribution of iridophores to body patterning is discussed thereafter.

To understand the role of the interactions between melanophores and xanthophores in stripe formation, Maderspacher and Nuesslein-Volhard

Identification of feedback loops consistent with the Turing model

The inferred interaction network between melanophores and xanthophores is shown in Figure 3. There are two feedback loops in this network. One involves mutual inhibitory interactions that function locally. Given that this feedback loop contains two negative interactions, it produces a similar result to that of a positive feedback loop. The second feedback loop is one in which melanophores exhibit a local, negative effect on xanthophores, while the latter induce a long-range, positive effect on

Mechanisms of cell–cell interactions

Recent attempts to identify the molecular and cellular factors involved in the cell–cell interactions that are responsible for pattern formation have revealed some unexpected cellular events and roles in the interaction network. For example, Inaba et al. isolated pigment cells from fins and plated them in a culture dish to study the in vitro behavior of mixed melanophores and xanthophores [60]. They found that xanthophores extend dendrites toward melanophores, and that contact with a

The role of iridophores in body stripes

In the fins, where the pigment pattern comprises melanophores and xanthophores, the interaction network described above is sufficient to explain pattern formation. However, in the body trunk, pigment patterns cannot form without iridophores 45, 46, 55, 56. Recent investigations focused on iridophores are gradually revealing the role of this cell type in pigment pattern formation. Iridophores are the first cell type to form clusters in the hypodermis of the body trunk 55, 63. Detailed tracking

Directionality of stripes

Local interactions, such as those responsible for pattern formation in the Turing model, cannot establish the global directionality of the pattern. Specifying the direction of the stripes first requires settling on an orientation, based on some specific biological indicator [15]. In the absence of directionality, a labyrinthine pattern develops [15]. In contrast to the body trunk, which grows uniformly during development, the fins grow mainly at the end (i.e., they undergo appositional growth).

A Turing mechanism is consistent with the current model

As discussed above, experimental studies over 15 years have gradually revealed the underlying mechanism of pigment pattern formation in zebrafish. Some findings were expected based on the original Turing model, but others were not.

Artificial ablation of pigment cells induced the dynamic regeneration of the pigment pattern that is specifically predicted based on the mathematical model [14], and the interaction network that is deduced from various cellular analyses satisfies the conditions that

Concluding remarks and future directions

Although the actual biological mechanism for pigment pattern formation has been outlined, many of the molecular details remain unknown. The nature of the signal transduction at the tip of the cell projection should be verified through more experiments of a definitive nature, and it is possible that some important interactions have not yet been identified. The role of iridophores is also an important subject for further study, and our understanding of the putative network that is currently known

References (67)

  • J.D. Murray

    How the leopard gets its spots

    Sci. Am.

    (1988)
  • S.B. Carroll

    Endless Forms Most Beautiful

    (2005)
  • A. Turing

    The chemical basis of morphogenesis

    Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci.

    (1952)
  • H. Shoji

    Origin of directionality in the fish stripe pattern

    Dev. Dyn.

    (2003)
  • R.T. Liu

    Two-stage Turing model for generating pigment patterns on the leopard and the jaguar

    Phys. Rev. E

    (2006)
  • H. Meinhardt et al.

    Pattern formation by local self-activation and lateral inhibition

    Bioessays

    (2000)
  • H. Meinhardt

    Models of Biological Pattern Formation

    (1982)
  • H. Meinhardt

    The Algorithmic Beauty of Seashells

    (1995)
  • J.D. Murray

    Mathematical Biology

    (2003)
  • S. Kondo et al.

    A reaction-diffusion wave on the skin of marine angelfish Pomacanthus

    Nature

    (1995)
  • D.M. Parichy et al.

    Temporal and cellular requirements for Fms signaling during zebrafish adult pigment pattern development

    Development

    (2003)
  • M. Yamaguchi

    Pattern regulation in the stripe of zebrafish suggests an underlying dynamic and autonomous mechanism

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

    (2007)
  • A. Nakamasu

    Interactions between zebrafish pigment cells responsible for the generation of Turing patterns

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

    (2009)
  • M.C. Gibson

    The emergence of geometric order in proliferating metazoan epithelia

    Nature

    (2006)
  • M.C. Milinkovitch

    Crocodile head scales are not developmental units but emerge from physical cracking

    Science

    (2013)
  • S. Kondo et al.

    Reaction-diffusion model as a framework for understanding biological pattern formation

    Science

    (2010)
  • H. Meinhardt

    Turing's theory of morphogenesis of 1952 and the subsequent discovery of the crucial role of local self-enhancement and long-range inhibition

    Interface Focus

    (2012)
  • V.M. Bedell

    In vivo genome editing using a high-efficiency TALEN system

    Nature

    (2012)
  • R.N. Kelsh

    Zebrafish pigmentation mutations and the processes of neural crest development

    Development

    (1996)
  • J. Odenthal

    Mutations affecting xanthophore pigmentation in the zebrafish, Danio rerio

    Development

    (1996)
  • P. Haffter

    Mutations affecting pigmentation and shape of the adult zebrafish

    Dev. Genes Evol.

    (1996)
  • L.F. Clancey

    Maintenance of melanophore morphology and survival is cathepsin and vps11 dependent in zebrafish

    PLoS ONE

    (2013)
  • E.H. Budi

    Embryonic requirements for ErbB signaling in neural crest development and adult pigment pattern formation

    Development

    (2008)
  • Cited by (107)

    • Trends and variation in vertebrate patterns as outcomes of self-organization

      2021, Current Opinion in Genetics and Development
      Citation Excerpt :

      Exquisite pigmentation markings have served as emblematic examples. Natural and laboratory-induced zebra fish pigmentation variants or differences between jaguar and leopard spots can be recapitulated with the same Turing models using value modifications of diffusion, degradation, or concentration [25,26]. Modifying the size or shape of simulation frames reproduced different snake pigment patterns [27], changes in stripe numbers in marine angelfish at different stages of growth [28], or changes from stripes to spots according to body location in wildcats [29].

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text