Blind snakes beneath the surface: Continuing the legacy of Richard Thomas

Laver, Rebecca J.; Daza, Juan D.

doi:10.1002/ar.24744

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This may not be so troublesome for PD as one might assume because convergence may apply only to a (potentially superficial) subset of features. A blind snake has a remarkable resemblance to an earthworm, but closer inspection of their bodies would reveal the clear divergence of their less obvious features (Laver and Daza, 2021). Convergent evolution requires two different ancestor species to have evolved to become similar in certain respects.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic Biodiversity Metrics Should Account for Both Accumulation and Attrition of Evolutionary Heritage

Rosindell

Manson

Gumbs

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phylogenetic metrics are essential tools in ecology, evolution and conservation. For example, Phylogenetic Diversity (PD) is one of the most prominent measures of biodiversity. PD is based on the idea that biological features accumulate along the branches of phylogenetic trees. We argue that PD, and other phylogenetic biodiversity metrics, fail to accommodate an essential biological process: 'information loss', the possibility that features, and biological information in a more general sense, can be lost through the process of evolution. We introduce Generalised Phylogeny Diversity (GPD), which is founded on the joint processes of information accumulation and loss, and which can be applied to phylogenetic trees or more complex networks. We derive a dimensionless measure φ from GPD that reproduces species richness and PD at opposite ends of a continuum as information loss varies. We suggest how a whole 'calculus' of PD-based metrics, and other phylogenetic biodiversity metrics, can be recast to incorporate information loss. To illustrate our approach, we give three empirical applications all reliant on new measures using the information loss concept. First, in ecology, evaluating φ as a predictor of community productivity against species richness and PD. Second, in evolution, quantifying living fossils and resolving their associated controversy. Third, in conservation, using a partitioning of GPD to re-balance our priorities at the broad scale of the complete tree of life.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic Biodiversity Metrics Should Account for Both Accumulation and Attrition of Evolutionary Heritage

Rosindell

Manson

Gumbs

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is not as troublesome for PD as one might assume because convergence may only apply to a (potentially superficial) subset of features. A blind snake has a remarkable resemblance to an earthworm, but closer inspection of their bodies would reveal the clear divergence of their less obvious features ( Laver and Daza 2021 ). Convergent evolution requires two different ancestor species to have evolved to become similar in certain respects.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Phylogenetic Biodiversity Metrics Should Account for Both Accumulation and Attrition of Evolutionary Heritage

Rosindell,

Manson,

Gumbs

et al. 2023

Systematic Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phylogenetic metrics are essential tools used in the study of ecology, evolution and conservation. Phylogenetic diversity (PD) in particular is one of the most prominent measures of biodiversity, and is based on the idea that biological features accumulate along the edges of phylogenetic trees that are summed. We argue that PD and many other phylogenetic biodiversity metrics fail to capture an essential process that we term attrition. Attrition is the gradual loss of features through causes other than extinction. Here we introduce ‘EvoHeritage’, a generalisation of PD that is founded on the joint processes of accumulation and attrition of features. We argue that whilst PD measures evolutionary history, EvoHeritage is required to capture a more pertinent subset of evolutionary history including only components that have survived attrition. We show that EvoHeritage is not the same as PD on a tree with scaled edges; instead, accumulation and attrition interact in a more complex non-monophyletic way that cannot be captured by edge lengths alone. This leads us to speculate that the one dimensional edge lengths of classic trees may be insufficiently flexible to capture the nuances of evolutionary processes. We derive a measure of EvoHeritage and show that it elegantly reproduces species richness and PD at opposite ends of a continuum based on the intensity of attrition. We demonstrate the utility of EvoHeritage in ecology as a predictor of community productivity compared with species richness and PD. We also show how EvoHeritage can quantify living fossils and resolve their associated controversy. We suggest how the existing calculus of PD-based metrics and other phylogenetic biodiversity metrics can and should be recast in terms of EvoHeritage accumulation and attrition.

show abstract

Blind snakes slink, wriggle, and bump through the pages of The Anatomical Record in a novel Special Issue

Laitman

Miller

2021

The Anatomical Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Blind snakes beneath the surface: Continuing the legacy of Richard Thomas

Cited by 3 publications

References 14 publications

Phylogenetic Biodiversity Metrics Should Account for Both Accumulation and Attrition of Evolutionary Heritage

Phylogenetic Biodiversity Metrics Should Account for Both Accumulation and Attrition of Evolutionary Heritage

Phylogenetic Biodiversity Metrics Should Account for Both Accumulation and Attrition of Evolutionary Heritage

Blind snakes slink, wriggle, and bump through the pages of The Anatomical Record in a novel Special Issue

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About