Phylogeography is concerned with the observation, description and analysis of the spatial distribution of genotypes and the inference of historical scenarios. In the past, the discipline has concentrated on the historical ‘phylo‐’ component through the utilization of phylogenetic analyses. In contrast, the spatial ‘‐geographic’ component is not a prominent feature of many existing phylogenetic approaches and has often been dealt with in a relatively naive fashion. Recently, there has been a resurgence of interest in the importance of geography in evolutionary biology. Thus, we believe that it is time to assess how geographic information is currently handled and incorporated into phylogeographical analysis. Geographical information systems (GISs) are computer systems that facilitate the integration and interrelation of different geographically referenced data sets; however, so far they have been little utilized by the phylogeographical community to manage, analyse and disseminate phylogeographical data. However, the growth in individual studies and the resurgence of interest in the geographical components of genetic pattern and biodiversity should stimulate further uptake. Some advantages of GIS are the integration of disparate data sets via georeferencing, dynamic data base design and update, visualization tools and data mining. An important step in linking GIS to existing phylogeographical and historical biogeographical analysis software and the dissemination of spatial phylogenies will be the establishment of ‘GeoPhylo’ data standards. We hope that this paper will further stimulate the resurgence of geography as an equal partner in the symbiosis that is phylogeography as well as advertise some benefits that can be obtained from the application of GIS practices and technologies.

No abstract

Synthetic science promises an unparalleled ability to find new meaning in old data, extant results, or previously unconnected methods and concepts, but pursuing synthesis can be a difficult and risky endeavor. Our experience as biologists, informaticians, and educators at the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center has affirmed that synthesis can yield major insights, but also revealed that technological hurdles, prevailing academic culture, and general confusion about the nature of synthesis can hamper its progress. By presenting our view of what synthesis is, why it will continue to drive progress in evolutionary biology, and how to remove barriers to its progress, we provide a map to a future in which all scientists can engage productively in synthetic research. G.G. Simpson (1944) As articulated eloquently by Simpson more than 60-years ago, any attempt to elucidate the history and nature of life from a grand perspective must link clues from different scientific fields and disparate geographic, temporal, and physical scales. ple, Darwin's (1859) fundamental insights came from the union of Malthusian population dynamics, careful observation of artificial selection and natural variation, Smith's economic principles, and geological evidence of the immense age of the Earth. Similarly, the 20th century transformation of biology and the unification of microevolution and macroevolution during the Modern Synthesis resulted from discourse and collaboration between researchers working on heritability, paleontology, development, speciation, Mendelian genetics, natural selection, and systematics (Fisher

No abstract