  Developmental constraints have been postulated to limit the space of feasible
phenotypes and thus shape animal evolution. These constraints have been
suggested to be the strongest during either early or mid-embryogenesis, which
corresponds to the early conservation model or the hourglass model,
respectively. Conflicting results have been reported, but in recent studies of
animal transcriptomes the hourglass model has been favored. Studies usually
report descriptive statistics calculated for all genes over all developmental
time points. This introduces dependencies between the sets of compared genes,
and may lead to biased results. Here we overcome this problem using an
alternative modular analysis. We used the Iterative Signature Algorithm to
identify distinct modules of genes co-expressed specifically in consecutive
stages of zebrafish development. We then performed a detailed comparison of
several gene properties between modules, allowing for a less biased and more
powerful analysis. Notably, our analysis corroborated the hourglass pattern
only at the regulatory level, with sequences of regulatory regions being most
conserved for genes expressed in mid-development, but not at the level of gene
sequence, age or expression, in contrast to some previous studies. The early
conservation model was supported with gene duplication and birth that were the
most rare for genes expressed in early development. Finally, for all gene
properties we observed the least conservation for genes expressed in late
development or adult, consistent with both models. Overall, with the modular
approach, we showed that different levels of molecular evolution follow
different patterns of developmental constraints. Thus both models are valid,
but with respect to different genomic features.
