Библиография

1. 1. Ефремова С.М. 1972. Морфофизиологический анализ развития пресноводных губок Ephydatia fluviatilis и Spongilla lacustris из диссоциированных клеток // Бесполое размножение, соматический эмбриогенез и регенерация. Ред. Б. П. Токин. Л.: Изд-во ЛГУ, 1972. C. 110–154.
2. 2. Короткова Г.П. 1981. Общая характеристика организации губок // Морфогенезы у губок. Ред. Короткова Г.П. и др. Труды Биол. ин-та ЛГУ, № 33. с. 5–51.
3. 3. Alié A., Hayashi T., Sugimura I. et al. (2015). The ancestral gene repertoire of animal stem cells // Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2015. V. 112. P. E7093–E7100.
4. 4. Arendt D., Musser J.M., Bake C. et al. (2016). The origin and evolution of cell types // Nature Reviews Genetics. 2015. V. 17. P. 744–757.
5. 5. Ballarin L., Karahan A., Salvetti A. et al. Stem cells and innate immunity in aquatic invertebrates: bridging two seemingly disparate disciplines for new discoveries in biology // Front. Immunol. 2021. V. 12. P. 688106.
6. 6. Ben-Hamo O., Rosner A., Rabinowitz C. et al. Coupling astogenic aging in the colonial tunicate Botryllus schlosseri with the stress protein mortalin // Dev. Biol. 2018. V. 433. P. 33–46.
7. 7. Cheung T.H., Rando T. A. Molecular regulation of stem cell quiescence // Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2013. V. 14. P. 329–40. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm3591
8. 8. Clevers H., Watt F.M. Defining adult stem cells by function, not by phenotype // Ann. Rev. Biochemistry. 2018. V. 87. P. 1015–1027.
9. 9. Ereskovsky A.V. Stem cells cell in sponges (Porifera): an update // ISJ-Invert. Survival J. 2019. V. 16. P. 62–63. https://doi.org/10.25431/1824-307X/isj.v0i0.60-65
10. 10. Ereskovsky A., Lavrov A. Porifera // Invertebrate Histology. 2021. Elise E. B., LaDouceur E.E.B., Ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc. P. 19–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119507697.ch2
11. 11. Ereskovsky A., Borisenko I.E, Bolshakov F.V., Lavrov A.I. Whole-body regeneration in sponges: diversity, fine mechanisms and future prospects // Genes. 2021. V. 12, 506. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes12040506
12. 12. Ereskovsky A., Rinkevich B., Somorjai I.M.L. Adult stem cells host intracellular symbionts: The poriferan archetype // Advances in aquatic invertebrate stem cell research. Balarin L., Rinkevich B., Hobmayer B. Eds. 2022. MDPI Books. P. 80–108. https://doi.org/10.3390/books978-3-0365-16не36-3
13. 13. Ereskovsky A., Melnikov N.P., Lavrov A. Archaeocytes in sponges: simple cells of complicated fate // Biol. Rev. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.13162
14. 14. Fraune S., Yuichi Abe Y., Bosch T. Disturbing epithelial homeostasis in the metazoan Hydra leads to drastic changes in associated microbiota // Environ. Microbiol. 2009. V. 11. P. 2361–2369.
15. 15. Funayama N. The cellular and molecular bases of the sponge stem cell systems underlying reproduction, homeostasis and regeneration // Internat. J. Dev. Biol. 2018. V. 62. P. 513–525.
16. 16. Funayama N., Nakatsukasa M., Hayashi T., Agata K. Isolation of the choanocyte in the fresh water sponge, Ephydatia fluviatilis and its lineage marker, Ef annexin // Dev. Growth Diff. 2005. V. 47. P. 243–253.
17. 17. Funayama N., Nakatsukasa M., Mohri K. et al. Piwi expression in archaeocytes and choanocytes in demosponges: insights into the stem cell system in demosponges // Evol. Dev. 2010. V. 12. P. 275–287.
18. 18. Gaino E., Rebora M., Corallini C., Lancioni T. 2003. The life-cycle of the sponge Ephydatia fluviatilis (L.) living on the reed Phragmites australis in an artificially regulated lake // Hydrobiologia. 2003. V. 495. P. 127–42.
19. 19. Grün D., Muraro M.J., Boisset J.C. et al. De novo prediction of stem cell identity using single-cell transcriptome data // Cell Stem. Cell. 2016. V. 19. P. 266–277.
20. 20. Hackett K., Lynn D., Williamson D. et al. Cultivation of the Drosophila sex-ratio spiroplasma // Science. 1986. V. 232. P. 1253–1255.
21. 21. Kobiałka M., Michalik A., Walczak M. et al. Sulcia symbiont of the leafhopper Macrosteles laevis (Ribaut, 1927) (Insecta, Hemiptera, Cicadellidae: Deltocephalinae) harbors Arsenophonus bacteria // Protoplasma. 2016. V. 253. P. 903–912.
22. 22. Levy S., Elek A., Grau-Bové X. et al. A stony coral cell atlas illuminates the molecular and cellular basis of coral symbiosis, calcification, and immunity // Cell. 2021. V. 11. P. 2973–2987.
23. 23. Li L., Xie T. Stem cell niche: structure and function // Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2005. V. 21. P. 605–631.
24. 24. Martinez P., Ballarin L., Ereskovsky A.V. et al. Articulating the “stem cell niche” paradigm through the lens of non-model aquatic Invertebrates // BMC Biology. 2022. V. 20:23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-022-01230-5
25. 25. Mashanov V.S., Zueva O.R., Rojas-Catagena C., Garcia-Arraras J.E. Visceral regeneration in a sea cucumber involves extensive expression of survivin and mortalin homologs in the mesothelium // BMC Dev. Biol. 2010. V. 10, e117.
26. 26. Marescal O., Cheeseman I.M. Cellular mechanisms and regulation of quiescence // Developmental Cell. 2020. V. 55. P. 259–271.
27. 27. Melnikov N.P., Bolshakov F.V., Frolova V.S. et al. Tissue homeostasis in sponges: quantitative analysis of cell proliferation and apoptosis // J. Exp. Zool. Pt B: Mol. Dev. Evol. 2022. V. 338. P. 360–381 https://doi.org/10.1002/jez.b.23138
28. 28. Minchin E.A. (1900). Sponges — phylum Porifera // Treatise on Zoology. V. 2. The Porifera and Coelenterata. E. Ray Lankaster. Ed. P. 1–178. Adam and Charles Black, London.
29. 29. Moore N., Lyle S. Quiescent, slow-cycling stem cell populations in cancer: a review of the evidence and discussion of significance // J. Oncol. 2011. V. 2011, 396076. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/396076
30. 30. Musser J.M., Schippers K.J., Nickel M. et al. Profiling cellular diversity in sponges informs animal cell type and nervous system evolution // Science. 2021. V. 374. P. 717–723.
31. 31. Nakanishi N., Jacobs D.K. The early evolution of cellular reprogramming in animals // Deferring Development: Setting Aside Cells for Future Use in Development and Evolution. 2020. (eds C. D. Bishop, B. K. Hall). P. 67–86. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
32. 32. Okamoto K., Nakatsukasa M., Alié A. et al. The active stem cell specific expression of sponge Musashi homolog EflMsiA suggests its involvement in maintaining the stem cell state // Mechanisms Dev. 2012. V. 129. P. 24–37.
33. 33. Penrose L.S., Penrose R. Impossible objects: a special type of visual illusion // British Journal of Psychology. 1958. V. 49. P. 31–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1958.tb00634.x
34. 34. Pflugfelder B., Cary C.S., Bright M. Dynamics of cell proliferation and apoptosis reflect different life strategies in hydrothermal vent and cold seep vestimentiferan tubeworms // Cell Tissue Res. 2009. V. 337. P. 149–165.
35. 35. Rinkevich B., Ballarin L., Martinez P. et al. A pan-metazoan concept for adult stem cells: The wobbling Penrose landscape // Biol. Rev. 2022. V. 97. P. 299–325. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12801
36. 36. Sebé-Pedros A., Chomsky E., Pang K. et al. Early metazoan cell type diversity and the evolution of multicellular gene regulation // Nature Ecol. Evol. 2018. V. 2. P. 1176–1188.
37. 37. Simpson T.L . The Cell Biology of Sponges. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1984. 662 p.
38. 38. Sogabe S., Hatleberg W.L., Kocot K.M. et al. Pluripotency and the origin of animal multicellularity // Nature. 2019. V. 570. P. 519–522.
39. 39. Wagner G.P. Devo-Evo of cell types // Evolutionary Developmental Biology. A Reference Guide. 2019. L. N. De La Rosa, G. B. Müller Eds. P. 511–528. Springer International Publishing, Cham.
40. 40. Waddington C.H. The Strategy of the Genes. London: Geo Allen & Unwin, 1957.
41. 41. Weissman I. L. Stem cells: units of development, units of regeneration, and units in evolution // Cell. 2000. V. 100. P. 157–168.
42. 42. Yun C.O., Bhargava P., Na Y. et al. Relevance of mortalin to cancer cell stemness and cancer therapy // Sci. Rep. 2017. V. 7. P. 42016.