» Articles » PMID: 33805549

Whole-Body Regeneration in Sponges: Diversity, Fine Mechanisms, and Future Prospects

Overview
Journal Genes (Basel)
Publisher MDPI
Date 2021 Apr 3
PMID 33805549
Citations 14
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

While virtually all animals show certain abilities for regeneration after an injury, these abilities vary greatly among metazoans. Porifera (Sponges) is basal metazoans characterized by a wide variety of different regenerative processes, including whole-body regeneration (WBR). Considering phylogenetic position and unique body organization, sponges are highly promising models, as they can shed light on the origin and early evolution of regeneration in general and WBR in particular. The present review summarizes available data on the morphogenetic and cellular mechanisms accompanying different types of WBR in sponges. Sponges show a high diversity of WBR, which principally could be divided into (1) WBR from a body fragment and (2) WBR by aggregation of dissociated cells. Sponges belonging to different phylogenetic clades and even to different species and/or differing in the anatomical structure undergo different morphogeneses after similar operations. A common characteristic feature of WBR in sponges is the instability of the main body axis: a change of the organism polarity is described during all types of WBR. The cellular mechanisms of WBR are different across sponge classes, while cell dedifferentiations and transdifferentiations are involved in regeneration processes in all sponges. Data considering molecular regulation of WBR in sponges are extremely scarce. However, the possibility to achieve various types of WBR ensured by common morphogenetic and cellular basis in a single species makes sponges highly accessible for future comprehensive physiological, biochemical, and molecular studies of regeneration processes.

Citing Articles

Microtubule organization and tubulin post-translational modifications in intact tissues and during regeneration in calcareous sponges.

Skorentseva K, Bolshakov F, Saidova A, Lavrov A Cell Tissue Res. 2025; .

PMID: 40042682 DOI: 10.1007/s00441-025-03960-8.


The Buds of Oscarella lobularis (Porifera, Homoscleromorpha): A New Convenient Model for Sponge Cell and Evolutionary Developmental Biology.

Rocher C, Vernale A, Fierro-Constain L, Sejourne N, Chenesseau S, Marschal C J Exp Zool B Mol Dev Evol. 2024; 342(8):503-528.

PMID: 39364688 PMC: 11587685. DOI: 10.1002/jez.b.23271.


Transient Interphase Microtubules Appear in Differentiating Sponge Cells.

Golyshev S, Lyupina Y, Kravchuk O, Mikhailov K, Gornostaev N, Burakov A Cells. 2024; 13(9.

PMID: 38727272 PMC: 11082956. DOI: 10.3390/cells13090736.


The Physiological Inorganic Polymers Biosilica and Polyphosphate as Key Drivers for Biomedical Materials in Regenerative Nanomedicine.

Muller W, Neufurth M, Wang S, Schroder H, Wang X Int J Nanomedicine. 2024; 19:1303-1337.

PMID: 38348175 PMC: 10860874. DOI: 10.2147/IJN.S446405.


The salamander blastema within the broader context of metazoan regeneration.

Tajer B, Savage A, Whited J Front Cell Dev Biol. 2023; 11:1206157.

PMID: 37635872 PMC: 10450636. DOI: 10.3389/fcell.2023.1206157.


References
1.
Mookerjee S, Ganguly B . Contact reaction of cells in sponge aggregation. Wilhelm Roux Arch Entwickl Mech Org. 2017; 155(5):525-534. DOI: 10.1007/BF00572814. View

2.
Soubigou A, Ross E, Touhami Y, Chrismas N, Modepalli V . Regeneration in the sponge partly mimics postlarval development. Development. 2020; 147(22). DOI: 10.1242/dev.193714. View

3.
KOROTKOVA G, TOKIN B . [Evolutionary patterns of reductive morphogenesis]. Nauchnye Doki Vyss Shkoly Biol Nauki. 1979; (11):5-17. View

4.
Borisenko I, Adamska M, Tokina D, Ereskovsky A . Transdifferentiation is a driving force of regeneration in Halisarca dujardini (Demospongiae, Porifera). PeerJ. 2015; 3:e1211. PMC: 4556153. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.1211. View

5.
Bode P, Bode H . Formation of pattern in regenerating tissue pieces of hydra attenuata. I. Head-body proportion regulation. Dev Biol. 1980; 78(2):484-96. DOI: 10.1016/0012-1606(80)90348-6. View